Princely Burials – Not Just A Short-Lived Phenomenon – From Anglo-Saxons to the Modern Papacy

Note: My tutor and I hold different views on this topic. He argues that princely burials should be seen as a short-lived phenomenon, based on broader burial patterns in the 6th century. However, I would suggest that while the overt display of princely burials may have declined, their influence persisted in later, Christianised forms of elite burial. There is nuance in both positions, and I think it's worth exploring how elements of richly furnished burial practices may have evolved rather than vanished.

I returned to university this week and sat a collection based on Anglo-Saxon English society and economy c.600 -750. One of the questions was “Why were princely burials such a short-lived phenomenon?” I argued against this and stated that princely burials in their construction were not short-lived but evolved towards the Church. The passing of His Holiness Pope Francis earlier last week got me thinking. As a prince of the Church and his papal name ‘Francis’, how would he incorporate ‘princely burial’ elements in his own funerary and burial rites?

Rather than a short-lived phenomenon of the early Anglo-Saxon period, princely burial evolved through the Christianisation of England and into the modern Catholic Church. This piece explores that evolution and argues that such burials are very much still with us today.

Thanks to Jialin for proofreading.

--

The Anglo-Saxon World: Rich Graves and Social Power

Princely burial was a burial rite often associated with elite graves in the 5th to 7th centuries, such as those in Anglo-Saxon England. Examples of such burials include the sites of Prittlewell in Essex and Sutton Hoo in Suffolk. The Prittlewell Prince is dated to the late 6^th and early 7^th centuries and contains a richly furnished chamber burial. It was essentially a sunken chamber lined by timber to create the effect of a room. Here, the deceased was laid to rest within a wooden coffin, and a small gold-foil cross was placed over each eye. These may have been possible indicators of Christian faith, but they could also have been a means of paying for the soul’s transportation to the afterlife, as Grierson argues in the purpose of coinage in the later Sutton Hoo burial.[1] Lavish goods such as drinking horns, gaming pieces, weaponry, and bowls were also secured on the walls. Whilst not visible from above ground, the richness of the grave shows the performative nature of burial for the Anglo-Saxon society, paying respect to the deceased through material culture. This idea transcended the 7th century, too. Richly furnished graves were often the norm for elite classes in this period and acted as a means to connect the past and the present to confirm status. It was as if the ruling class were calling upon their supporters to legitimise their positions. Therefore, it was essential to continue such rites as challenges to their status occurred.

By comparison, the impression left by Mound One on the landscape at Sutton Hoo would have been significant. A 7th-century site, Sutton Hoo echoes the importance of princely burial as a societal ritual, as Scull argues, for marking status and respect for the deceased. Unlike the Prittlewell Prince’s grave, which is not visible, the grandeur of the ship burial at Sutton Hoo would have attracted the attention of passersby on the River Deben. This, coupled with the grandeur of the goods found at the site – drinking horns, gaming pieces, Merovingian coinage, and Byzantine links with a silver plate discovered – indicates the importance of grave goods and supposed ceremony in the deceased's interment. 27km away from Sutton Hoo, another ship burial at Snape also mirrors the importance of linking the past to the present. At Snape, a signet ring was discovered. This mirrored the Roman use of signet rings as markers of connectivity between emperors and communities. Princely burial was, as such, more than just a way of burying the dead but an active political statement of status.

 The Prittlewell Prince burial chamber and its grave goods are reconstructed by artist Faith Vardy (part of the coffin is cut away to show its contents). (Image: MOLA via https://archaeology.co.uk/articles/features/new-secrets-from-prittlewell-reconstructing-a-burial-chamber-fit-for-a-prince.htm)

Conversion and Continuity: The Church’s Role in Burial Practices

Princely burial saw a transformation in use during conversion within England. Following the arrival of the Augustine mission of 597 AD, the kingdom of Kent converted to Christianity. With this conversion came a change in ideas and attitudes towards death. Whereas earlier pagan society had placed high value on grave-goods as accompanying the deceased, and acting as markers of respect, the Church wished for a more pious approach. Lethbridge and Leeds argued in the 1930s that from the 7th century, we began to see a ‘Final Phase’ model for burial practices. As part of this, they argued that grave goods reduced in frequency, and a more straightforward burial approach was adopted. This is to an extent seen through cemeteries at sites like Chamberlain’s Barns in Leighton Buzzard, where there is a clear distinction between older and newer burial practices aligning their cemeteries. Cemetery 1 is unordered and has two overlapping graves, while Cemetery 2 is ordered in rows, with the deceased’s heads in the same orientation.

Sites like Chamberlain’s Barns were more local in focus and simpler in terms of goods, unlike the princely burials of Sutton Hoo and Prittlewell. Still, the final phase model does not seem to be observed by all of society, especially not in the case of the Church. If we are to believe that princely burials were just ‘short-lived’ and essentially declining after conversion, then why do we still see the placement of rich grave goods in graves?

 

Reinterpreting Status: The Church and the ‘Final Phase’

Princely burials do not disappear; they evolve to become accessible burial practices of the elite. Status remains vital in a period in which kingdoms are still emerging, as such, reinvestment in the Church following conversion plays a significant role in how the elite view burial. For example, SS Peter and Paul was a Church site built by King Ethelbert for his burial. Here, there is a move from landscape usage, such as mounds, to new structures of permanence – church buildings made of stone. This move is best exemplified through the burial of Cuthbert. His death on the 20^th of March 687 AD saw his fellow brothers in Christ lay him to rest in an elaborate oak coffin, and initially honour his request to be buried near his oratory. In addition to his coffin, he was buried with fine vestments and a 6.4cm pectoral cross, which was gold with garnets inlaid. The need to cement the status of the Church within converted England was important for the future of ecclesiastical settlements. As such, the richness of his grave shows that there was a reinterpretation of princely burials, and not a complete stop to them.

Cuthbert is not the only example of rich burials within the Church. Rich female burials have been discovered at a number of sites, including Trumpington in Cambridgeshire, the Loftus Princess bed burial in York and the Westfield Farm cemetery of Ely (Cambridgeshire). While Hines suggests an earlier pattern of conspicuous destruction of wealth, Hamerow argues that the 7th century marks a pivot toward investing in elite female burials, reflecting the evolving role of women in Christianised communities. Hamerow is essentially saying that there is a shift in how princely burials as a practice present themselves. This is important as it shows the possibility of it evolving – a crucial factor for considering its longevity in the modern day.

 

Princely Burial in the Modern Era

So, regarding the importance of rich burial now being a feature of the emerging church, how does this impact our view of the term ‘princely burials’ in modern contexts? The main form of princely burial today can be seen through royal burial traditions and ceremonies, such as the state funeral of Elizabeth II, or the Catholic Church and the interment of its Popes. In the second half of this post, I shall explore just how the role of the Catholic Church and its continuation of ornate burial of Popes is a form of ‘princely burial’ in the modern day.

Pope Francis, known for his humility, made specific requests for his funeral that defied tradition. For example, rather than being buried in multiple layers of cypress, lead, and oak, he chose a single wooden coffin, a personal decision that reflects his modesty. However, his status as Pope means that even in death, the rituals surrounding his burial are imbued with the grandeur of his office, echoing the princely burials of ancient times.

It is likely that Pope Francis would have accepted a simple burial, but his status as Pope makes that complex to navigate. As a former cardinal of the Church (a ‘prince of the Church’), he was entrusted with the most holy offices and was the leader of the Catholic faith. Much like with St Cuthbert, whose burial combined personal humility with broader ecclesiastical expectations, Pope Francis’s funeral rites reflect a balance between individual wishes and the symbolic weight of his office. The status of his office needs to be reflected as the papacy and the world mourn the loss of the 266^th Pope. However, in his fashion he has managed to alter some traditions at his request, these include not being placed in three coffins made of cypress, lead and oak – instead he will be placed in one made of wood lined with zinc – and while lying in state his coffin will not be placed on an elevated bier, but instead facing the pews. Furthermore, he will be buried in Santa Maria Maggiore outside the Vatican, unlike many of his predecessors in the Grottos beneath St Peter’s Basilica. The placement of Pope Francis’s remains will indicate his personal decisions, not those of his office. Still, his body will be subject to the Papacy in ceremony, dress and direction from death to interment.

 

Material Memory: Clothing, Objects and Symbolism

Papal authority outweighs personal authority and evokes similar ideas of ‘princely burial’. Anglo-Saxon princely burial was focused on goods and status, and ensuring this was shown to not just the deceased – honouring them – but cementing them in the memory of the community – burial location, goods and size. It is quite likely that burials were observed, and although mythical, Beowulf provides good reason to acknowledge funerary mourners. Women are seen to be ‘lamenting’ at the loss, and the community creates a spectacular ‘pyre’ for the cremation of the deceased. These elements of rich burial are, as such, seen later in the 7^th century with Cuthbert, and again present today with the funerary rituals of the Papacy.

Objects and garments are the most significant indicators of princely burial today.
The garments and objects surrounding princely burials hold immense significance for the deceased and the living. Like Cuthbert’s intricately designed vestments, Pope Francis’s liturgical garments will tell the story of his life’s work, his authority, and the enduring legacy of the Church. Like Cuthbert’s grave, Pope Francis will be interred in garments that express his status within the Church. For Cuthbert, this was the Opus Anglorum vestments; for Pope Francis, red liturgical garments, the mitre (representing episcopal office), the pallium, and a candle in his hands.[2] Grave goods are still used to express status and authority and leave an impression on those watching the funeral—and also on any future observers who may happen to open the coffin or tomb. As such, it is clear that there are elements of princely burial present in high-status burials today.

Pope Francis lying in state – image from GETTY IMAGES via BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyqg50gzevo)

To conclude, looking at how elite burial practices change over time helps us understand how societies choose to remember, mourn, and show authority, whether in a seventh-century kingdom or the modern Papacy. The key features of princely burials—status shown through objects, the importance of place, and ritual involvement—have stayed surprisingly consistent. High-status roles often connect themselves to the past to make their authority feel more legitimate. Pope Francis is just one example of how the Papacy still uses burial to confirm the Church’s power, mark the importance of its Popes, and prepare for the next. In that sense, princely burials — and the performances of memory, status, and authority they involve — have stayed important throughout history.

For further reading, see works by Gittos, Hines, Hamerow, and Grierson.

---

[1] Grierson, ‘The Purpose of the Sutton Hoo Coins’, Antiquity 44 (1970), pp. 16-17

[2] Rist, R., ‘Pope Francis: His Legacy and What Happens Next’, University of Reading, 21 April 2025, accessed 25 April 2025 via: https://www.reading.ac.uk/news/2025/Expert-Comment/Pope-Francis-Expert-comments-on-his-legacy