This is a long-awaited volume, but a marvellous one: a substantial monograph, drawing on a wealth of academic expertise, it reports fully on the internationally important early medieval chamber grave found during archaeological assessment at Southend-on-Sea in 2003, but also takes the opportunity to re-analyse its related cemetery. After framing of the excavations and previous finds in the local area in the first two chapters, Chapter 3 details (and re-interprets) the earlier finds from excavations at Priory Crescent and during railway works in the 1920s and 30s. These burials are unusual in themselves and help, perhaps, to provide some context for the chamber grave. Dating from the third quarter of the 6th century, with burial lasting over 70–100 years, the gender ratios are heavily skewed towards male-associated burial, with at least 23 (and as many as 29) associated with weapons and similar grave goods, while just five or six graves appear to be female-associated (the authors are to be congratulated here for the care with which they have pieced together a poorly recorded and clearly later-confused assemblage). While a substantial part of the flat-grave cemetery must have been destroyed by the railway cutting in the 19th century, zoning by gender would be extremely unusual for a cemetery of the early medieval period. This is probably therefore a real pattern, which both reflects the dramatic decline in grave good-associated burial in the later 6th and early 7th centuries but also indicates that, in having large numbers of weapon burials, it was an unusual site. Chapters 4 to 7 report on the chamber grave itself, covering the meticulous excavation and detailed reconstruction of the chamber grave and associated primary barrow; close discussions of the artefacts (which include a range of interesting and unusual vessel types, a lyre, a folding stool and other containers and furniture as well as more personal goods), organic remains and burial practice; a very thorough account of the chronological analysis, which used seriation as well as radiocarbon dating, before placing it in the wider context of ‘princely’ barrow burials of the later 6th and 7th centuries. The dating is important: probably in the range AD 580–600, it is highly likely that the burial pre-dates the ‘official’ arrival of Christianity back into SE Britain via the Augustinian mission in AD 597, and instead reflects on high-status contacts with Kent and further afield well before this point, as well as an awareness of neighbouring Christian communities. For this is clearly a Christian burial, despite the elaborate nature of the furnishing. As the authors point out more than once, there is no contradiction in this period between furnished and Christian burial, and there is an accumulation of convincing evidence that this was the grave of a convert: the Latinate gold-foil crosses placed almost certainly over the eyes; the hanging bowl suspended above the head of the coffin; the painted maplewood box containing a silver spoon and an arguably amuletic cylindrical container; the flagon probably made for an eastern Mediterranean pilgrim market; and, most unusually, the placing of weapons away from the body, rather than intimately associated with it. There is also the intriguing argument that the burial (represented unfortunately by just two scraps of remaining tooth enamel) was that of a young man — perhaps very young, to judge by the use of garters as part of the funerary costume, the inclusion of an arrow and the provision of a box or casket (elements which are seen in a handful of other high-status male burials of this specific period). There is a detailed catalogue and a series

中文翻译：

---

普里特维尔王子的墓葬。2003 年，埃塞克斯郡滨海南端修道院新月修道院的发掘

这是一本期待已久的书，但却是一部了不起的书：一本内容丰富的专着，借鉴了丰富的学术专业知识，它全面报道了 2003 年在滨海绍森德的考古评估中发现的具有国际重要意义的中世纪早期墓葬，但也借此机会，重新分析了其相关墓地。在前两章对当地的发掘和以前的发现进行框架化之后，第 3 章详细介绍（并重新解释）了在 1920 年代和 30 年代在新月修道院和铁路工程期间的发掘中的早期发现。这些墓葬本身很不寻常，也许有助于为墓葬提供一些背景。可以追溯到 6 世纪第三季度，葬礼持续了 70-100 年，性别比例严重偏向男性相关的葬礼，至少有 23 个（和多达 29 个）与武器和类似的坟墓有关，而似乎只有五六个坟墓与女性有关（在此祝贺作者们小心翼翼地拼凑出一个糟糕的坟墓）记录并清楚地后来混淆了组合）。虽然平坟墓地的很大一部分肯定在 19 世纪被铁路切割摧毁了，但对于中世纪早期的墓地来说，按性别划分的区域是非常不寻常的。因此，这可能是一个真实的模式，它既反映了 6 世纪后期和 7 世纪早期严重的良伴墓葬数量急剧下降，也表明这里拥有大量的武器墓葬，这是一个不寻常的地点。第 4 章到第 7 章报告了密室坟墓本身 涵盖墓室坟墓和相关初级手推车的细致挖掘和详细重建；仔细讨论文物（包括一系列有趣和不寻常的器皿类型、七弦琴、折叠凳和其他容器和家具以及更多个人物品）、有机遗骸和埋葬实践；在将其置于 6 世纪后期和 7 世纪后期“王子”墓葬的更广泛背景下之前，它对年代分析进行了非常彻底的说明，该分析使用了系列序列和放射性碳测年法。年代很重要：可能在公元 580 年至 600 年的范围内，葬礼很可能早于公元 597 年通过奥古斯丁传教团“正式”到达不列颠东南部的基督教，而是反映了高地位在此之前与肯特和更远的地方接触，以及对邻近基督教社区的认识。因为这显然是一个基督教葬礼，尽管家具很精致。正如作者不止一次指出的那样，在这个时期，家具和基督教墓葬之间没有矛盾，并且有大量令人信服的证据表明这是一个皈依者的坟墓：拉丁金箔十字架几乎可以肯定地放在眼睛；悬在棺材头上方的吊碗；装有银勺和可以说是护身符的圆柱形容器的彩绘枫木盒子；酒壶可能是为东地中海朝圣者市场制作的；最不寻常的是，将武器放置在远离身体的地方，而不是与身体密切相关。还有一个有趣的论点是，墓葬（不幸的是，只有两块剩余的牙釉质碎片）是一个年轻人的墓——也许很年轻，通过使用吊袜带作为葬礼服装的一部分来判断，包括一个箭头和提供一个盒子或棺材（在这个特定时期的少数其他高地位男性墓葬中可以看到这些元素）。有详细的目录和系列