1987
DOI: 10.1017/s0003598x00072926
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Burnt mounds as saunas, and the prehistory of bathing

Abstract: The physical scale of buildings like the Baths of Caracalla give the clearest indication of the importance of bathing in the classical order of things – though whether what Romans did in the bath was always clean and decent may be an open question. But what about the prehistory of bathing, and particularly of bathing in steam? An answer is given here which links the historical and ethnographic record to burnt mounds, among the more common and puzzling types of north European site.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
28
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The function of burnt mounds has been the subject of considerable debate over the years, which has in essence oscillated between cooking (O'Kelly 1954; O'Drisceoil 1988; Barber 1990a; Moore and Wilson 1999) and steam bathing (Barfield and Hodder 1987;Barfield 1991;Armit and Braby 2002), though other industrial functions such as salt production, brewing or wool production have also been postulated (Barfield 1991, 62-64;Ripper 2003;Dockrill 2007, 73-74) as well as a recognition that not all burnt mounds need have shared the same function (Barber 1990a, 101) or have been limited to simply one function either (O'Drisceoil 1988, 671;Quinn and Moore 2007, 11). Given that the burnt mound at Meur was probably never far from the sea, the deliberate choice of collecting and boiling fresh water, not saltwater, however, would suggest that the production simply of steam, or of salt, was not the intended primary function.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The function of burnt mounds has been the subject of considerable debate over the years, which has in essence oscillated between cooking (O'Kelly 1954; O'Drisceoil 1988; Barber 1990a; Moore and Wilson 1999) and steam bathing (Barfield and Hodder 1987;Barfield 1991;Armit and Braby 2002), though other industrial functions such as salt production, brewing or wool production have also been postulated (Barfield 1991, 62-64;Ripper 2003;Dockrill 2007, 73-74) as well as a recognition that not all burnt mounds need have shared the same function (Barber 1990a, 101) or have been limited to simply one function either (O'Drisceoil 1988, 671;Quinn and Moore 2007, 11). Given that the burnt mound at Meur was probably never far from the sea, the deliberate choice of collecting and boiling fresh water, not saltwater, however, would suggest that the production simply of steam, or of salt, was not the intended primary function.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interpretations include the heating of stones to boil water linked with cooking meat, but very few animal bones have been found in these mounds. Barfield and Hodder (1987) argue instead that the creation of large amounts of steam is more likely, so they may be understood as saunas or steam baths, perhaps like North American Indian sweat lodges linked to acts of purification and ritual cleansing. Gent's functionalist interpretation suggests that the Burlescombe mounds may have been used for some 'form of industrial activity, such as the production of textiles' (Gent 2007: 43).…”
Section: Parallelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is also a complete lack of human ecto-parasites such as head or body louse (Pediculus humanus L.) or human fleas (Pullex irritans L.). Both species of parasite are fairly common in settlement sites (ie, Kenward & Hall 1995) and might be expected to be associated in some numbers with the waste of 'sweat lodges' (ie, Barfield & Hodder 1987). Certainly, regardless of whether these burnt mounds are being used for the cooking, or as 'sweat lodges', it seems unlikely that they were being used intensively or continuously for long periods of time Faunal remains, contemporary with burnt mound (Tony Gouldwell) Two of the aurochs bones were radiocarbon dated to the second half of the 3rd millennium cal BC (Table 1: …”
Section: Insect Remains (David Smith)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The shallow post-holes recorded around the northern hearth might be evidence of a structure used for steam bathing (cf. Barfield & Hodder 1987) but the clear evidence from the hearth of heating in situ would have rendered any enclosed space very smoky, and such a use is not considered plausible. Alternatively the post-holes may have supported a frame to dry materials near to the hearth.…”
Section: The Function Of Burnt Moundsmentioning
confidence: 99%