Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian Archaeology in France, 1830–1914

431 Pages·2012·5.531 MB·English

by  Bonnie Effros

Title Pages
Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian
Archaeology in France, 1830-1914
Bonnie Effros
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199696710
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2015
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199696710.001.0001
Title Pages
(p.i) Oxford Studies in the History of Archaeology
(p.iii) Uncovering the Germanic Past
(p.iv)
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research,
scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade
mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Bonnie Effros 2012
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2012
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
without the
Page 1 of 2
Title Pages
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as
expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the
scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University
Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011945236
ISBN 978–0–19–969671–0
Printed in Great Britain by
MPG Books Group, Bodmin and King’s Lynn
Page 2 of 2
Endorsement
Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian
Archaeology in France, 1830-1914
Bonnie Effros
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199696710
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2015
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199696710.001.0001
Endorsement
(p.ii) Oxford Studies in the History of Archaeology consists of scholarly
works focusing on the history of archaeology throughout the world. The series
covers the development of prehistoric, classical, colonial, and early historic
archaeologies up to the present day. The studies, although researched at the
highest level, are written in an accessible style and will interest a broad
readership.
Page 1 of 1
Dedication
Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian
Archaeology in France, 1830-1914
Bonnie Effros
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199696710
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2015
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199696710.001.0001
Dedication
(p.v) To David
Page 1 of 1
Epigraph
Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian
Archaeology in France, 1830-1914
Bonnie Effros
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199696710
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2015
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199696710.001.0001
Epigraph
(p.vi) ‘Pour bien décrire l’expression de l’ornementation barbare, il
faudrait emprunter la plume d’un buveur de haschisch ou le pinceau d’un
fumeur d’opium.’
Quoted by Louis Courajod from Wilhelm Lübke, Essai d’histoire de l’art 1:
293, in his Leçons professées à l’École du Louvre (1887–1896) 1, ed. H.
Lemonnier and A. Michel (Paris, 1899), 29.
‘Le Barbare a tout détruit, semble-t-il; mais, qu’importe: sur les ruines
mêmes, pénétrés de l’Esprit qui ne saurait mourir, se sont levés les
évêques, défenseurs des Cités, les grands moines qui ont réappris à
l’homme comment, sous l’effort, l’épi mûrit sur les décombres en même
temps que, dans la nuit, jaillit la lumière; derrière eux, conquis par leur
parole ardente, les guerriers et les rois, brûlant ce qu’ils avaient adoré, ont
su, à travers bien des orages, faire naître la douce France, héritière de la
tradition gréco-latine, en même temps que Fille aînée de l’Église.’
É. Salin, Rhin et Orient: Le haut moyen-âge en Lorraine d’après le mobilier
funéraire. Trois campagnes de fouilles et de laboratoire 1 (Paris, 1939), 9.
‘La fouille d’une tombe lui vaut à un travail de chirurgie: c’est en réalité la
dissection d’un moment du passé. Seul un praticien très entraîné pourra
retirer de la fouille un maximum de données grâce auxquelles il pourra
reconstituer le milieu culturel, social et matériel existant au moment de la
mort d’un être humain.’
L. Frédéric, Manuel pratique de l’archéologie (Paris, 1967), 208.
Page 1 of 2
Acknowledgements
Uncovering the Germanic Past: Merovingian
Archaeology in France, 1830-1914
Bonnie Effros
Print publication date: 2012
Print ISBN-13: 9780199696710
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2015
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199696710.001.0001
(p.vii) Acknowledgements
My decision to indulge a long-standing interest in the early years of French
antiquarianism and archaeology followed a decade of work on early medieval
burial rites. The starting point for any study of early medieval burial practice in
Gaul is still the indispensable, but often frustratingly incomplete, publications of
the nineteenth-century men who first uncovered some of the most important
cemeteries known today.1 As my research on the material traces of the Germanic
invaders of Gaul drew me repeatedly to the writings of French amateur
archaeologists, I learned how the long shadow cast by this century still affected
archaeological publications. Moreover, despite the increasing sophistication of
methodological techniques and theoretical approaches, the narrative established
in the 1800s regarding the early history of Gaul remains remarkably prescient
and continues to shape how we interrogate and interpret early medieval realities
in mortuary contexts.
Page 1 of 6
Acknowledgements
The impact of the prolific yield of the excavations of early archaeologists was
also evident during my first encounters with European museums housing
Merovingian antiquities in the mid- to late 1990s, including the Musée
d’archéologie nationale (formerly the Musée des antiquités nationales) in Saint-
Germain-en-Laye and the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz.
These institutions, overflowing with collections first assembled in the mid-
nineteenth century and still in possession of some of their original casework and
inventory books from this era, bear little resemblance to North American
repositories of early medieval grave artefacts in art museums, including the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Cleveland Museum of Art, and the Walters Art
Museum, among others. Purchased mainly in the early twentieth century, the
latter group differ from their European counterparts in that they consist mainly
of unprovenanced artefacts acquired by collectors through dealers or auctions.
Consequently, these institutions’ interest in the era of the ‘Germanic migrations’
is primarily stylistic and aesthetic (p.viii) rather than archaeological in focus.
The contrast between these displays and those in Europe, where cemeterial
provenance had more immediate implications, pushed me to pose questions
about the conditions of their initial discovery and interpretation. Local
excavators in France understood the regional nuances and national significance
of finds in ways overlooked by institutions that acquired artefacts through the
antiquities market. However, both the short-and long-distance trade in artefacts
embodied in both kinds of collections had significant impact on the development
of Merovingian archaeology in France.2
The natural threads connecting what seemed at first to be a web of disparate
figures and finds were archaeological societies. That the main avenue of enquiry
into the past incarnations of early medieval archaeology led me to the doors of
the nineteenth-century meeting rooms of all-male antiquarian societies caused
some trepidation: a project on modern France did not seem the most accessible
path for a practising medievalist whose work usually ended at the accession of
the Carolingian dynasty. A combination of curiosity, self-interest (what better
excuse could I ever find to explore provincial France?), and ignorance of what
lay ahead, propelled me to take the plunge into national and département
archives in France. The path taken by my research, however, was not
overcrowded by outsiders. The modest phenomenon of national archaeology,
which transpired in local and unprofessionalized settings, lacked the high-stakes
drama of the monumental plunder of classical antiquities or the religious
controversy of antediluvian studies. I quickly learned the ways in which
provincial institutions exerted an extraordinary pull on the directions in which
the fledgling discipline ebbed and flowed. In the absence of strong central
leadership, regional learned organizations provided an audience for what
otherwise might have remained isolated studies.
Page 2 of 6
Acknowledgements
As my research progressed, I focused on charting the process by which national
archaeology, still a loosely defined subject in the early 1800s, quietly emerged as
an academic discipline and professional calling in the early decades of the
twentieth century. These developments told a story that was not unique to
France but which occurred in numerous permutations across Western Europe
over the course of (p.ix) the century. Avoiding the approach of highlighting the
contributions of individual players to the exclusion of the communities in which
they operated, I concentrated on documenting the collective structures and
external events that supported, or in some instances impeded, the success of
local exploration. While in various département archives, I observed the uneven
streams of communication that moved between various regions and Paris. As
local learned societies were seldom known outside the regions in which they
operated, despite the increasing ease of communication during the course of the
century, it became necessary to judge the reasons why limited familiarity with
the publications of these tight circles of initiates persisted. Although their own
writings suggested the supreme importance of research in local history and
archaeology, I wanted to determine who in the nineteenth century agreed with
amateur practitioners that national archaeology was worthy of serious attention.
For practical reasons, I restricted my project on French national archaeology to
studies of the Merovingian period, which nineteenth-century amateurs
considered just one element of the emerging discipline. First, the broader
project had already been undertaken by others better prepared for this
enormous undertaking.3 Moreover, there were distinct advantages to this choice
since reducing the number of players involved would allow me to spend more
time in the archives and depend less upon secondary accounts of the period.
Third, Merovingian archaeology straddled the ‘Great Divide’ that increasingly
separated classical philological approaches from the methodology of
prehistorians;4 the subject allowed me to measure how amateurs borrowed from
the specializations that suited their objectives. Finally, and perhaps most
importantly, focusing on the ownership, display, representation, interpretation,
and reception of artefacts considered to be Frankish, Burgundian, and
Visigothic, made it possible to explore the impact of this unexpected,
contentious, and sometimes unwelcome material culture on contemporary
accounts of France’s origins. As opposed to Gallic or Gallo-Roman remains,
excavated materials associated with the Frankish conquest of (p.x) Gaul
presented an ideal test case for the uncertain process by which artefacts once
thought better forgotten were integrated into the narrative of French history.
Widespread ignorance of, and in some instances conscious rebuffs to,
Merovingian archaeology suggested that it was not always anticipated that
poorly understood debris from this era would come to be accepted as part of
France’s national patrimony.
Page 3 of 6
Acknowledgements
Executing this project has not just taught me about the nineteenth century; it
has also conveyed lessons about my own scholarly identity as a historian
working with material culture. After poring through thousands of nineteenth-
century postcards, letters, and journals, I repeatedly saw the significance of
personal friendships and official connections in achieving archaeological
ambitions. My own debts are similarly great to those who have supported this
project over the years and whose assistance enabled me to complete it. My
initial research on the world of antiquities collecting in Europe and America was
financed by a Sylvan C. Coleman and Pamela Coleman Memorial Fund
Fellowship at The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Title F Leave from
Binghamton University (State University of New York) (2001–2). I owe great
thanks to Melanie Holcomb, the late Dafydd Kidd, and Christine Brennan, whom
I met in the medieval department, for their suggestions and advice at various
points in developing this project.
Although my progress slowed considerably while serving two years as chair of
my department at Binghamton University from 2004 to 2006, archival research
in Europe at periodic intervals was made possible by a Binghamton University
Individual Development Award (United University Professsors) (2002–3), a
Franklin Research Grant from the American Philosophical Society (2004), and
generous and repeated travel funding from Jean-Pierre Mileur, then Dean of
Harpur College of Arts and Sciences at Binghamton University. A year dedicated
to writing was made possible by a semester-long chair’s research leave from
Binghamton University and a housing grant from the Römisch-Germanisches
Zentralmuseum in Mainz (Fall 2006), followed by a fellowship sponsored by the
Wittgenstein Stiftung at the Institut für Mittelalterforschung of the
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Vienna and Title F Funding
from Binghamton University (Spring 2007). I am very grateful to Falko Daim and
Walter Pohl, directors of each of these institutions, respectively, for making these
arrangements, backing this project from its (p.xi) early stages, and sharing
their enthusiasm and friendship as I pushed forward. A sabbatical leave from
Binghamton University (Spring 2008) and travel support from the Interim Dean
of Harpur College, Ricardo Laremont, allowed me to revise most of the
manuscript prior to my move to the University of Florida in August 2009 to
assume the Rothman Chair and directorship of the newly founded Center for the
Humanities and the Public Sphere. I am grateful for the support provided by the
Rothman Endowment and the Department of History at the University of Florida,
both of which have made it possible, after long delay, to bring this project to a
close.
Page 4 of 6
Acknowledgements
A large debt of gratitude is due to Patrick Périn, Director of the Musée
d’archéologie nationale de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, where the heart of this
research was conducted. Without his open invitation to make use of the
museum’s resources for more than a decade and his sage advice as to where
else in France I might find additional repositories of letters and unpublished
excavation journals, it would have been truly folly to think that this project was
possible. I would also like to give special thanks to Cécile Treffort, who not only
provided me with my first real-life glimpse of an antiquarian society, the
venerable Société des antiquaires de l’Ouest, but also extended warm hospitality
in Poitiers and generous assistance at multiple points in this undertaking.
Although the list of people who have helped along the way is long, and I fear
that I have inadvertently omitted some of them, I would like to acknowledge as
many as possible of the colleagues and friends who came to my assistance in
myriad ways in the course of writing this book. These include Barry Ager, Peter
Brown, Elisa Camiscioli, Nina Caputo, Hélène Chew, Gisela Clauss, Marc
Commelongue, Thierry Dechezleprêtre, Heather DeHaan, Marilynn Desmond,
Wendy Doyon, Chantal Dulos, Arleen de Vera, Jim Effros, Michelle Effros, Hubert
Fehr, Svante Fischer, Patrick Geary, Björn Gesemann, André and Catherine
Ghiselli, Maria Gindhart, Agnès Graceffa, Diane Griewe, Dave Hacker, Jeffrey
Hamburger, Mitch Hart, Jane and Steve Hochman, Jörg Jarnut, Vincent Juhel,
Wulf Kansteiner, Bill Laber, Caroline and Steve Laber, Maneesha Lal, Christiane
Lhomme, Laurence Lyncée, Alison McQueen, Laura Morowitz, Ralph Patrello,
Daniel Perrier, Helmut Reimitz, Martin Schönfelder, Jean Soulat, Alice
Stumberger, Françoise Stutz, Bernadette Suau, Françoise Vallet, Tjorbjörn
Wandel, Leslie Webster, Andrew Welton, Howard Williams, and Sonja Wolf.
(p.xii) In the final stages of writing, Hilary O’Shea was very supportive as the
manuscript wound its way through the review and publication process at Oxford
University Press. Bettina Arnold, Stephen Dyson, Colin Jones, Howard Williams,
and Ian Wood generously commented on late drafts of the manuscript and made
numerous suggestions that helped me to expand the book’s comparative
discourse. Two anonymous external readers pushed me to provide context for
French developments in the broader world of archaeology and to clarify the role
of Merovingian discoveries within it. Although I could not meet all of their
expectations, I believe that their insightful critiques have made this book much
stronger. Likewise, Elizabeth Stone’s eagle eye caught many blunders in the
typescript. Any deficiencies remaining in the resulting monograph owe to no one
but myself.
Page 5 of 6