Kingdom in Sicily at the end of the eleventh century (Giesey 1960:20). The first ...... portant part. As Ocko has already argued in discussing the Merina, an.
12 Excarnation, Evisceration, and Exhumation in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe Estella Weiss-Krejci
Human bones may enter the archaeological record as articu lated, disarticulated, or cremated deposits. Tbe archaeologist must explain the differences in the physical remains of the dead and determine the causes rhat are responsible for variability in the mortuary record. One first step to accomp lish such a goa l is to decide whether deposits with human remains represent expressions of funerary behavior or result from other processes. This is not an easy task. Human remains from funeral rituals, for example, may end up .in nonfunerary conrexts. Banes and artifacts from river burials will be most likely found in nonfunerary contexts, if found at all (Bradlcy 1995). Bones in funerary contexts, by contrast, may be thc product of various natural and cu ltural postdeposir.ional proccsses (O'Shea 1984:25-26; Schiffer 1987) or may represent a phase in a program of mo rtu ary trcatment (Brown 1995b: 16; Hutehinsan and Aragon 2002). When eorpses are incomplete or disarticulated, it is diffieult to evaluate the original burial mode. This may be one reason why arehaeologists refer to such deposits as "secondary burials" without regard to their potential comp lex nature. There exists increasing awa reness among mortuary speeia li sts that rhe concepr of ' seeondary burial" implies a wide range of rather unrelated mortuary praetiees (Houlbrooke 1998:372; Orschiedt 1997; Williams and Beck 2001 ). A rerm that does not allow researchers to distinguish between seco ndary rites in lndonesia (Hertz 1960 [1907]) and the relocation of bones into European charnel houses is bound to eonfuse any cross-cultural discussion of morruary practiees. Additionally, rhere is no common ly applied method to eva lu ate whether disarticulated remains resu lt from human sacrifice, eannibali sm, body processing or reburial, and only a few studies have addressed the problern (for examplc, Murphy and Mallory 2000; Peter-Röcher 1997). ln the past I have discussed the complex potential seenarios of "secondary burial" formation using historical data from two European clynasties, the Babenbergs and the Habshurgs. I have shown that both multistage burial programs (body proeessing and temporary storage} and postdepositional proeesses (post-
156
Estella \\''eiss-Krejci
funeral relocation and disturbance) are responsib le for a high percentage of disarticulared rem a ins in elite mortuary contexts. Of a sample of 868 people who died bet:ween A.D. 994 a nd 1993, 40 percent of the rernai ns had been rampered wit:h in one way or the other. 'fhree were excanlated, an d 32 had been temporarily stored and later reburied . ßones of 70 peop le had been moved from one country, town, or building into ano ther after the funeral; 247 corpses had been relocated inside a building. Additionally, coffins of 226 individuals had been either renewed or opened. No specific intention can be made responsible for rbese manipulations. Tbe reasons for "secondary burial'' formation lie in a wide range of circumstantial and intenrional, ritualisric and nonritualistic behavior (\'V'eiss-Krejci 2001 :778-779). Such pnKesses arenot resrricted to the hurials of rhe Rabenbergsand 1-Iabsburgs but occurred arnong many rne rnbcrs of rh e European ;Jristocracy. Thc:re exists a body of litcra tu 1:e on the treannent and whereabours of corpses from a variety of o th cr European dynas ties (ßoasc 19 72; Brown ] 991; Dan iell 1997; Dodson 1994; Ehlers er al. 1996; Kolme r 1997; Mcyer 2000). This chaprer discusses the formarion of ''secondary bnrial" in a wider European context and reveals multiple and complex facrors rhat determined variabiliry in mortuary behavior among Medieval and post-i\r1edieva l elites.
Variability in Mortuary Treatment Bcfore th e nin eteen th century rhe ideal buria l mode in christianized was depos it ion of a bo dy in the flesh in consecrated gro unds. T his burial mode wa s born our of a deep concern with resurrection of thc bo dy. Cremation of thc corpse was considered a heathen procedure, and burning was scen as destruction of the body and hence the soul , and rherefore was used only as punishmenr for heretics (Finucane 1981:55-56; Naji rhis volume). The considerable size of rerritories under rhe rule of kin gs, long-distance warfare, pilgrimages ro Rome, inrerdynastic rnarriages, and the Crusades all resulted in kings, queens, and nobles lea d ing ve ry mobile Jives (figure 12.1 ). Despite their mobility, ar istocrats often ch(Jse, for a variet y of reasons, a specific burial fvl a n y nob les wanted to be buried in their own territories, surrou.nd ed farnily members, to await resurrectio n there (Boase 1972:1 13; Danie lll Schaller 1993:66 ). Especial ly witb the foundation of new orders between the eleventh and the thirteenth century, monastic lineage buria l places widely spread rhrough Europe . Founders of religious houses could expect spiritual welfare for rbemselves and their family members in return for rhcir donations. The mosr important new orders werc Cartusians (founded in I 084), Cisrercians (founded in 1098), Premonstratensians (founded in 1120), Franciscans (approved in 1209), and Dominicans (founclcd in 1214) (ßordua "1997; Dunn 1997). Roya l bu rial p!aces wen: sometirnes a lso establi shed in ncvvl y acq uired land s and served ro tie the fo rcig n d.ynast:y to the new territe was transporred to Vienna. The summer weather instigated tbe need for rapid burial, and on August 28 tbe royal corpse was temporarily laid ro rest at St. Srephen's Cathedral, accompanied by a "smatl" ceremony in which 6 bishops and 13 abbots and prelates were present (Lipburger 1997:132). The big funeral was scheduled to take place whenevcr rhe future emperor, Frederick's son M.aximilian 1, arrived, but this took a while. A few days after Frederick had been deposited, tbe Turks attackcd Carinthia, and Maximilian \vas too busy to hold the funcral. When Maxirnilian fina ll y arrived in Vienna, a pompous funeral was beld on December 6 and 7, bur rhere cxist doubts whether tbe corpse was prest:nt du ring the funerJl ( Lipburger 1997:133 ). Thirty years beforc his death Frederick bad commissioned a !arge marble monument in whicb he wanred to be buried (Hertlein 1997:139), bur in 1493 the tornb was not ready. Anorher 20 yea rs passed before the morta l remains cou ld be moved to tbeir final resting place. This last relocarion in November 1513 was accompanied by yer anotber funerary ceremony, almost as splendid as the one of December 1493, bur in rhe absence of Emperor !vfaximilian. From the records we know tbar rhis time the morral rcmains wcre displayed for a few days (Lipburger 1997:134) beforc they werc depositcd in the marble monument at St. Srephen's Cathcdral. For political reasons French King Lo ui s X also received two funcrals. "I'he king died suddenly and unexpectedly on June 5, 1316, in Paris and was buried two days later. His brother Philip of Poitier had misscd rbe funeral, but since Louis did not have an heir, Philip was one of the potential successors. ln missing his
168
Estella Weiss-Krejci
brother's funeral Philip bad failed to perform one of the functions expected of a person destined to succeed to the throne. So Philip arranged a second funeral five weeks after the first and thus secured the regency and ultimately the crown of France. In the second funeral Louis X was not disinterred, but clothes were laid on bis grave. According to Brown (1978:256), Philip clearly intended the ceremony to be seen as a second funeral, not an ordinary commemorative service. The use of historical evidence from Europe underscores the problern of equating deposition of the corpse and funeral. Some stored corpses were never moved to their destined buriallocation, and some people did not receive the full funerary treatment, whereas others received more than just one funeral. Postfuneral Processes DisturlJance Once a body is finally buried, a series of other formation processes can change its state. Disturbance frequently occurred in burial crypts into which sequential interments were made. Bones were disturbed when coffins were opened during inspections. Artifacts were sometimes removed and bones taken. Charlemagne's grave, after having been hidden from the Normans in 882, was disturbed by Emperor Otto III in 1000 and Frederick Barbarossa in 1165. Otto III cut Charlemagne's nails, broke a tooth from the jaw, and took a golden cross and parts from the clothes. His deed was considered a sacrilege in bis time, and Otto's death two years later was seen as a just punishment by one chronicler (übler 1990:142). Postfuneral Relocation While a disturbed corpse at least remains in its original mortuary context, postfuneral relocation poses a serious problern from the point of mortuary analysis. In Medieval and post-Medieval Europe, relocation could take place within a crypt or funeral chamber, wirhin a building or building complex (internal relocation), or from one building, town, or country into another (external relocation). This happened for ritual and profane, friendly and hostile reasons (Weiss-Krejci 2001:775-778). Postfuneral Long-distance Transport Corpses were sometimes transporred over hundreds of kilometers and hundreds of years after the funeral, with bones ending up in rather unexpected places. In 1770 Abbot Mactin Gerbeet exhumed 14 Habsburgs who bad been buried in Switzerland between 1276 and 1386 and reburied them at bis newly rebuilt monastery St. Blasien in the Black Forest. But only 36 years later the monastery was secularized, and the convent was forced to leave. In 1809 the monks took the
Excarnation, Evisceration, and Exhumation in Europe
169
bones toSt. Paul im Lavanttal in Carinthia, where rhey were eventually buried in a small crypt under tbe main altar of the monastery church in 1936 (Gut 1999:1 05-110). These hurials can not be undersrood from the Ha bsburg perspcctivc. During the Habsburg rcign only one pcrson chosetobe buried in Carimhia-Maria Anna (died 1789), daughter of Maria Theresa, who had joined a convent there (Leitner 1989:102). It is primarily through the intentions and fatc of the monks rather than through rhe identity of the bones thar we can understand their present location.
Violence The most radical and destructive postdepositional process in European history, bothin scale and quantity, was exhumation of emperors, kings, queens, and their family members during the French revolution. "Let a ll the coffins of these divinized monsters be broken open! Let their memory be condemned!" wrote journahst Lebrun in a poem that was published February 6, 1793, in Paris (E. Brown 1985:252). By the end of the year any archaeological testimony of the royal funera l ce.remony (Giesey 1960) had disappeared . Tbc bodies from SaintDenis were thrown into rwo pits on the north side of the abbey (one called the Valois pit, holding the remains from Merovingian, Carolingian, Caperian, and Va lo is dynasties; the other, the Bourbon pit). During exhumation people took teeth, hair, bones, and other relics. But in 1817, three years after the accession of Louis XVlii, rhe descerared royal bones were exhumed once again. Since it was impossible to singleout individual bodies, the bones were put in five coffins (four for the Valois pit and one !arge one for the Bourbons) and reburied wirhin the abbey in a ceremony. Eventually funerary monuments were also rerurned ro the a bbey (E. Brown 1985:255-256). During domestic conflicrs vio lence was often dirccted against roya l corpses. King Wenceslas IV of Bohemia was descerared only a year after his dearh when rhe rnonastery of Zbraslaw (Kön igsaal, south of Prague) was plundered a nd ser on fire by raiding Tabo rites in 1420. According to one accoun t, men put the cadaver on the altar, adorned it with a crown made from hay, and poured beer over it (Mi !lauer 1830:59-60; Blahovä 1997: 102). The remains were collected by a loyal man and buriecl but were exhumed and reburied at Prague Cathedral in 1424 in a huge public funerary ceremony (Meyer 2000: 140). Ar Notre-Dame-deCiery, Huguenotts played ball wirh the head of Louis XI in 1562 (E. Brown 1985:250), and ar Saint-Den is the cadaver ofHenry IV was srruck by a woman during tbe exhumarion in 1793 (E. Brown 1985:253). During wars, tombs were also frequenrly desecratecl; grave goods were srolen, and the bones were disturbed or thrown out. The grave of Duke Freclerick I1 (Grave lX ) at Heiligenkreuz (sec figure 12.2) was probably opened and plundered by the Turks (Niemetz 1974:22).
170
Estella Weiss-Krejci
Ritual Deposition of Boncs While the relics of Ch risrian martyrs werc exhumed from the early Middle Ages on and distribured through Europe, in rhe later Middle Ages some royal corpses achieved saintly starus. Once canonized, the bodies were exhumed in the ritual of trans lation and the relics were moved to a morehonorab le position and distributed (Finucane 1981 :52-53). French King Louis LX was canonized 27 years after his death in l297. When his grandsnn Philip IV "rhe Fair" wamcd to move rhe remains frorn Saint-Denis to Paris, rhe monks first refused to give up the bones but finally gave in. In 1306 Philip was able to translate the upper parr of the king's bead to Saint-Chapel le. One rib was awarded to Notre-Darne; Louis' eh in, teeth, and mandible, which were considered the inferior part of rhe head, were left at Saint·Denis. fn 1304 Philip bad a lready prcsented one of Lou is' finger joinrs to rhe king of Norway (Brown ·.1980). Discussion Variability in morruary treatment has been interpreted as the result of
