Jan Bartek – AncientPages.com – The Sutton Hoo ship burial is one of the most renowned examples of richly adorned graves from southeast England in the late sixth and early seventh centuries.
The recent discovery of a similar site at Prittlewell, Southend (Essex), has enhanced our understanding of these historical burials, though some questions persist. How did those interred in these graves amass such wealth?
Why were they buried with numerous items from the eastern Mediterranean? Traditionally, it is believed that they obtained gold from their Merovingian neighbors and that imported goods arrived as gifts or through trade.
Uncovered in the late 1930s, Sutton Hoo—named after the Old English terms “Sut” and “hoo,” meaning a heel-shaped hill—was revealed to contain human remains and an entire ship. This site has become pivotal for researching East Anglia’s kingdom during the Anglo-Saxon era. It comprises 20 burial mounds near a North Sea port, suggesting that those buried there were significant figures, possibly even royalty. Some have speculated that one or more graves might belong to Byzantine kings.
Dating back to around 575 A.D., a period following Rome’s withdrawal from Britain, the region was left to evolve independently. Previous studies indicate the Byzantine army recruited British soldiers engaged against Sasanians in present-day Iran.
Helen Gittos, a medieval history professor at Oxford University in the UK, has recently proposed an intriguing new theory about the identity of those interred at Sutton Hoo.
A map of so-called ‘princely’ burials (in red) and other aristocratic burials in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Based on Blackmore et al., Prittlewell, fig. 266. © MOLA.
Professor Gittos points out that the current consensus is that the Sutton Hoo burials were associated with the development of kingship. However, according to her, this was a later rather than earlier stage in the process of kingdom formation when families were extending their reach beyond their own peoples to be overkings of neighboring territories. These power relationships were secured by gift-giving and payment of tribute, and in other ways too, such as through marriage alliances and the kinds of shared ceremonial likely to have accompanied both.
For several years, the professor has been meticulously studying artifacts from this site and others like it. She highlights that items such as jewelry, silver plates, swords, and shields are of exceptionally high quality. Interestingly, many of these artifacts share features with those found at other sites known for containing remains of local soldiers.
A notable example she provides is the ‘Prittlewell Prince,’ who was interred in a coffin within a small, partially underground chamber. This burial took place around 580–605 AD. The chamber contained various objects, some still hanging on their hooks upon excavation. Among these were items crafted in the eastern Mediterranean.
The Prittlewell princely burial. (a) Reconstruction of the chamber, (b) Spoon, (c) Flagon, (d) Copper-alloy basin, (e) Cylindrical container, (f) Hanging bowl. All images © MOLA.
Professor Gittos suggests that these similarities are unlikely to be coincidental. Instead, they indicate that those who buried individuals at Sutton Hoo likely held great respect for soldiers returning from service with the Byzantine army and viewed them as heroes deserving of grand funerals and burials. Additionally, recent excavations have dispelled the belief that only one man was buried alongside the ship at this site.
“The simplest explanation does not invoke unusual diplomatic gifts from Merovingian kings or a special shipment. Instead, I think the Prittlewell Prince obtained these goods when he was in the Middle East. And there is a good historical context to explain how and why he went.
In 575, the Byzantine army urgently needed more troops because of the renewed war with the Sasanians. Tiberius, ‘caesar’ under Justin II, ‘conducted a major recruiting campaign’, at great cost, on both sides of the Alps.
According to the early seventh-century historian Theophylact Simocatta, Tiberius ‘recruited multitudes of soldiers and rendered the recruits’ hearts eager for danger through a flowing distribution of gold, purchasing from them enthusiasm for death by respect for payment’.
Contemporary sources talk of ‘squadrons of excellent horsemen’ numbering some 150,000; modern historians think it more likely to have been in the region of 12,000–15,000.
Nonetheless, we are talking about large numbers of troops. These soldiers probably joined the newly formed Foederati as part of a major reorganisation of Byzantine forces.34 They served until the end of the war with the Sasanians in 591, continuing under emperors Tiberius II (578–82) and Maurice (582–602). Maurice himself had been in command of the troops on the eastern front from 577 to 582. It is conceivable that more western recruits may have joined up later on, although there is no evidence for this. All these soldiers were probably discharged in the 590s,” Professor Gittos writes in her study.
She emphasizes that the Foederati were primarily composed of elite cavalry units supported by infantry forces. These troops had the unique privilege of having their own attendants, who also served as soldiers. This arrangement reflected a Germanic tradition of personal retinues rather than employing paid servants for less affluent soldiers. Upon enlistment, they received uniforms and weapons but were subsequently provided with an annual stipend to purchase clothing, arms, and horse equipment.
(a) The ‘stand’ from Sutton Hoo mound 1, © The Trustees of the British Museum. (b) A replica of the stand made by Robin Pattinson: National Trust 1433770, © National Trust/Robin Pattinson. (c) Roman military standards depicted on Trajan’s Column, © Roger B. Ulrich. Credit: The English Historical Review (2025). DOI: 10.1093/ehr/ceae213
The ‘Tiberiani’ troops are believed to have been recruited from various groups such as the Franks, Burgundians, continental Saxons, Goths, Lombards, Bulgars, and Gepids. In the 590s, an officer named Godwin was stationed on the Balkan front. This led Michael Whitby to propose that Anglo-Saxons might have been recruited as well; however, despite Godwin being a common Anglo-Saxon name in later centuries (the tenth and eleventh), no earlier evidence supports this claim.
Nonetheless, it remains plausible that ‘Tiberiani’ could have included recruits from Britain. Historical records indicate established connections between Byzantium and Britain at that time. Moreover, Maurice’s military manual even mentions Britons’ adeptness at fighting in wooded areas.
The study was published in the English Historical Review
Written by Jan Bartek – AncientPages.com Staff Writer
