Bronze Age Sweat Lodge in Birmingham

[Moma_porcupine]

In another thread it came up that some archeologists in Birmingham UK were claiming the Sweat Lodge was used in Bronze Age England.

(Thanks to Kathryn NicDh? na for the link ) http://www.byac.org.uk/news/sweatlodge.html

For a long time it was thought these stones were relics left from ancient cooking methods – Experimental archaeology has shown that stones heated up in a fire then dropped into water, will cause the water to boil. The water stays hot long enough to cook vegetables and meat.

However, by looking at other cultures such as the Native Americans, another explanation for the shattered stones was found…. If water is poured onto hot stones, it causes the water to evaporate into steam. The process fractures the stones into the same pieces that are found in the burnt mounds.

This specific shatter pattern can only be made when the stones are heated to a great temperature and then cooled rapidly with water.

This is being taught to children and the idea seems to be being promoted by the Town Council and UK government .

I did some investigating
  http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=14127&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=1473
 

Over 30 "burnt mounds" have been found in Birmingham. These are low mounds, usually 10 to 15m across, composed of heat-shattered stone, charcoal and ash. Some of Birmingham's burnt mounds have been dated to between 1500 and 1000 BC by radiocarbon dating of the charcoal.

Excavation

Excavation of a burnt mound visible as a layer of burnt stones in a stream bank at Cob Lane in Bournville in 1980 and 1981 showed that it originally lay in a stream meander. Under the burnt mound, there were a burnt hollow, a timber and clay-lined pit next to the former stream bank, and many holes resulting from pointed branches being pressed into the ground. The former stream bed contained remains of beetles. The different beetle species indicate what the environment was like 3000 years ago, and included species usually found where animals are grazing. The silty clay on that the mound had accumulated is likely to be soil which had been loosened by ploughing on the slopes above the site, providing further evidence for prehistoric farming.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VBC-41Y8834-1G&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_
sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=65f279938077973b547156cd5d13d26eDating a burnt mound from Kilmartin, Argyll, Scotland*1

I. M. C. AnthonyCorresponding Author Contact Information, a, D. C. W. Sandersona, G. T. Cooka, D. Abernethyb and R. A. Housleyb
a Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre, East Kilbride, G75 OQF, UK
b Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK

Available online 21 December 2000.

Abstract

Around 1600 burnt mounds, comprising heaps of fire cracked stones, up to several metres across with characteristic forms, are listed in the National Monuments Records of Scotland, with a diverse distribution. Many more are known in other parts of Europe, notably in Ireland and Scandinavia. Traditionally, these monuments are thought to relate to cooking activities throughout the Bronze Age though in recent years alternative functions have been suggested. Here results are presented from Lady Glassery Wood, a recently excavated site in the Kilmartin Valley. Samples for luminescence dating were collected in 1998, together with field gamma spectrometry measurements. Associated charcoal has also been subjected to radiocarbon dating. Despite and unusually low internal radioactivity from the rock samples examined, and low luminescence sensitivities from separated minerals, it has been possible to obtain concordant luminescence ages from both quartz and feldspars, giving a mean date of 2800±300 BC. Radiocarbon dating produces a 2 sigma calibrated age range of approximately 2800–2400 cal BC, in agreement with the luminescence age, indicating a late Neolithic date for the mound, one of a growing number of early dates in Scotland.

 Excavation of a burnt mound visible as a layer of burnt stones in a stream bank at Cob Lane in Bournville in 1980 and 1981 showed that it originally lay in a stream meander. Under the burnt mound, there were a burnt hollow, a timber and clay-lined pit next to the former stream bank, and many holes resulting from pointed branches being pressed into the ground.

http://www.shropshire.gov.uk/archaeology.nsf/open/F38668A6BF03336C80256CB00032905A

Burnt Mounds comprise roughly circular deposits of burnt and fractured stones in black sooty soil, generally between c.10m - 20m in diameter and, if not ploughed down, they can survive up to 1m in height. They are usually situated close to a source of water, and are usually associated with a pit or sunken trough, lined with stones, wood, or clay. Burnt mounds are thought to be the remains of prehistoric cooking sites: stones would be heated on a hearth and dropped into the water-filled trough in order to boil meat. The stones would eventually fracture with repeated heating and rapid cooling, and would be discarded, together with cinders from the hearth, to form a mound. Other interpretations for burnt mounds have included the suggestions that they might have been wool processing sites (where woven wool was steamed to remove lanolin prior to dyeing) or saunas.

Burnt mounds are known from Ireland and the Northern Isles, and a number are also known from the West Midlands, particularly in the South Birmingham area. A few of these latter sites have been excavated, and radiocarbon dating has shown that the majority date to the Middle Bronze Age, from the period c.1500 - 1000 b.c.. Over 50 burnt mounds have also been recorded in Shropshire, mostly from around the edges of the former wetlands of northwest Shropshire and The Weald Moors. The burnt mound at Rodway is the first of these Shropshire sites to have been archaeologically excavated. The mound was similar in size, form, and composition to other excavated examples in the West Midlands, particularly those of the South Birmingham area.

The Rodway mound was seen to survive to a height of 0.2m and a large pit, interpreted as a water-trough, was found on its northern side. A grinding or rubbing stone was also recovered from the water trough. The stone might have been used for grinding meal, or for sharpening cutting tools - the latter use in particular would be appropriate if the site had been used for the butchery and cooking of cattle or game. A sample taken from the burnt deposits within the mound was sent to Queen's University Belfast for radiocarbon dating, and has given a date for the mound of c.1000 b.c..

http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/downloads/Burnt_Mounds.pdf.

Archaeological work in a gravel quarry near Watermead Country Park, Birstall, Leicestershire, by University of Leicester Archaeological Services has located the earliest human remains ever to be found in the county together with a late Neolithic Burnt Mound and an early Saxon bridge. Analysis of the human remains suggests that they met with violent deaths!

In addition to the evidence of human sacrifice there is a very early ‘burnt mound’ dating from the late Neolithic period (about 2500-2000BC).The characteristics of the Watermead
burnt mound are similar to those found on these sites elsewhere in the country: a proximity to water, a timber lined trough capable of holding water, two hearths with evidence that they were used to heat stones and a mound, albeit shallow, of waste charcoal and fire-cracked stones. No other burnt mound sites were detected in the locality. The most straightforward explanation of the usage of burnt mounds has always been that they were some form of seasonal cooking site, probably associated with hunting parties. At Watermead, as with the majority of excavated burnt mounds, there was an almost complete absence of cooking ‘debris’ to support this. It has been suggested that burnt mounds were used as saunas or sweat lodges. No evidence for a structure to contain steam was observed at Watermead, although such remains could easily be ephemeral. That the trough was heated seems indisputable (evidenced by the in situ fire-cracked whole stones) and would suggest that the boiling of water was the raison d’être for burnt mounds. A supply of ‘running’ water also appears to be an integral element. If that is accepted, and we have an indication from environmental evidence that the mound may principally have been used in the drier seasons, it could be suggested that the function of burnt mounds lies with a springtime or summer activity such as wool processing. Hot water is needed both to remove lanolin from wool for fulling and, when combined with friction, for the shrinking process that mats fibres to produce a felt.

http://www.angelfire.com/fl/burntmounds/textilecenters.html

There are some people who feel that the cooking and bathing theories are not quite satisfactory and they do not believe that fulachta fiadh were used for these purposes. There is one last major theory to be discussed. Some people believe fulachta fiadh may have acted as a place where cloth was prepared fulled, washed and/or dyed.

“Fulling is essentially the art of cleansing, shrinking and thickening cloth. (Jeffery 1991, 97). The end result is not only clean cloth but thicker, semi-waterproof cloth. The process dates back as far as 5000 BC and was practised all over Europe. It is quite a simple process requiring warm and cold water and a detergent of some kind.

To do all this a large tub is needed, the trough from a fulachta fian being ideal. A place to heat up stones for the water is also needed. The hearths from a fulachta fiadh site would do. Finally a small stream or band of water in which the material can be further waulked is needed. Most fulachta fiadh are positioned near a stream so water would have been in plentiful supply. Fulachta fiadh would have been ideal for this purpose. If we return to the Ballyvourney site, the ‘butchers’ block’ could have been used for preparing or cutting cloth, the hut for storing cloth or detergent, the ‘meat rack’ for hanging the cloth out to dry and the trough for fulling.

One last point to discuss is the fact the fulachta fiadh could easily have been ritual dyeing places rather than ritual bathing places.

At the moment fulachta fiadh seem a most likely candidate for centres of the production of clothes. They may have also had a ritual context.

I have no idea why anyone would imagine building an above ground domed Sweat Lodge was in any way an authentic re-creation of an activity that was done in a rectangular lined pit.

I notice the Birmingham websites neglect to mention the production of cloth as a much more likely explaination for the evidence that was found . That seems really unprofessional and irresponsible .
 
It seem especially strange to try and claim it must have been a Sweat Lodge because the  the fracture pattern could only be caused by cold water on hot rocks creating steam .
Just putting hot rocks in a trough of cold water would have the same effect. Why doesn't the website mention the more widely accepted possibility of cloth production?

If someone wants to insist these mounds were made by heating rocks to be used for bathing, a bathtub seems a more likely explanation than a Sweat Lodge.

I am not an archeologist , but I am guessing some people in this area have found claiming to have the site of a Bronze Age Sweat Lodge is good for tourism , even if that hypothesis isn't actually supported by the physical evidence .

[ra6as]

The following, from Shamans/Neo-Shamans: Ecstasies, Alternative Archaeologies and Contemporary Pagans, Robert Wallis (2003), expresses the possibly tendentious justification which some people feel for attempting a revival of European sweat ceremonies:

The speaker is Philip 'Greywolf' Shallcrass, page 101

Most of the people I know who work with sweat lodges in Europe have drawn inspiration from and usually had direct experience of Native American sweat lodge rites.  All are also aware of the tensions existing around this issue.  However, they are using that inspiration to establish a native European sweat lodge that once existed but had been lost.  Native American teachers have been generous enough to help us recover this important part of our spiritual heritage.  For this, we are sincerely grateful ... Now that many folk are beginning to work sweat lodges in Britain with the spirits of our own land and ancestry, we can acknowledge our debt to our Native American friends whilst abandoning any idea that we ourselves have to pretend to be Native Americans.

[Moma_porcupine]

ra6as

However, they are using that inspiration to establish a native European sweat lodge that once existed but had been lost.

Hi ra6as

As far as i know , there is no evidence of that what you are claiming ever existed. You are inventing facts to give you an excuse to disrespect Native peoples rights to protect their own culture and traditions.

Even in North America lots of indigenous people did not use a Sweat Lodge. You can't just assume this is a universal tradition.

There is some nice pictures of the ancient Irish Sweat Houses below.

http://www.irishmegaliths.org.uk/sweathouses.htm

Some of what is mentioned here might connect with the ancient traditions of fairie rings and farie hills, but whatever was going on back there, what IS known of these ancient traditions is in no way similar to the Lakota Sweat Lodge ceremony.

I suspect the evidence of sticks around the lined pits in England was to suspend the wet wool from so it would drip back into the pit, and could then be moved out of the way. otherwise people would find themselves working in a muddy and possibly stinky and staining mess.

[ra6as]

 
Then it would surely be a good token of respect, if British neo-shamans would avoid doing sweat ceremonies until there is archaeological evidence that ancient Britons did something similar.
 

[Moma_porcupine]

Quoting myself;

As far as i know , there is no evidence of that what you are claiming ever existed. You are inventing facts to give you an excuse to disrespect Native peoples rights to protect their own culture and traditions.

Gosh I'm sorry. I just realized you were quoting someone else's opinion and not your own.

So much  information I sometimes miss something important. Again I apologize for misunderstanding what you were saying!

[Kathryn NicDhàna]

Thanks for collecting all those links, Moma! You are ever the font of research :-)

As I said in the other thread (http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1527.0;all), I've been very involved in researching this stuff, and you are correct: Though some tradition of sweating existed in Gaelic areas, and in Portugal http://algarvivo.com/arqueo/ferro/alto-das-eiras.html what we know of those traditions is nothing like Inipi.

The information we have on the Gaelic sweathouses is that they were made of stone (many still stand, as seen on Anthony's page). A fire was built inside them, heating the entire structure. Once the stones of the building were sufficiently hot, the remains of the fire on the floor inside were swept out, and we have accounts of a person lying down inside on a bed of rushes, and praying or contemplating till they "reach a state of peace." As chinks are part of the structure, both due to the realities of building with stone, and due to the need for smoke to get out and air in, the experience would not be in total darkness unless performed at night. The structure recently restored in Portugal is very interesting, and consists of a stone structure much like the Gaelic one, but later (probably after Roman contact) augmented with additional spaces more resembling a Roman bathouse, yet still with Celtic-type iconography.

Anthony thinks psilocybin may have been involved, but I don't personally think there is convincing evidence for that. There would be room for a few people to sit in one together, but I'm unaware of any accounts of that.  It is possible that the structures were built after contact with Scandinavian peoples, so if any rituals connected with them resembled another culture, it would be to those cultures. However, sauna ceremonies that I know of are almost always communal, so that's a significant difference.

There are similar stone structures built here in New England, but no surviving knowledge of who built them. As the local Indigenous folks say they have nothing to do with them, the current archaelogical theory is that they were built by Irish or Scottish people who came in the usual waves of invasions/immigrations. I've been in one of these, and would concur with this.

There's one account from Martin Martin of a hole being dug in a floor and a hot "quartz rock" being used to create steam, with the affected part of the body held over the steam, but here we find even less about a ritual or spiritual use.

The first reconstruction at a Burnt Mound structure, that I know of, was by archaelogist Michael J. O'Kelley. (account and pictures in O’Kelley, Michael J., 1989. Early Ireland – An Introduction to Irish Prehistory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 223-227). They did not approach the site with preconceptions, except perhaps that it was used for cooking. This is reasonable as some of the surviving local names, fulacht fian "cooking place of the warrior band" and Fulacht na Mór Ríoghna - "the cooking pit of the Mórrígan" would indicate as much.

For the Ballyvourney reconstruction they put long poles in the remaining holes, resulting in a tall, conical shape. I think it more likely that, like more permanent houses of the period, the poles should have been placed straight up and a roof constructed separately, such as seen in roundhouses or other thatched structures. Again, no evidence of an Inipi shape at Ballyvourney. The cooking went quite well, though :-)

From the evidence I think it's likely they were like an outdoor kitchen and/or bathing area - I think the water pits were likely multipurpose, quite possibly used for bathing at one point, and dying or brewing or cooking at another.  The pole holes do not surround the water pit in the digs I've seen. The Ballyvourney structure has an additional, small hearth inside the ring of pole holes, but it is off to one side. There is no central pit. The fact that there is no central hearth, as is found in Irish dwellings of the period, would argue against the poles being used to make a dwelling of any sort. Also the alignment of what would most likely be the door does not line up with Irish dwellings.

The Fulacht Fiadh article I co-wrote on WP is not too bad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulacht_fiadh

During my late teens and early twenties, I attended some ceremonies in the Neopagan community that were basically Wiccan rituals in an Inipi structure.  That's what the people doing "Celtic" or "European" sweats seem to all be doing. I have to blushingly admit, back then (early eighties) I even designed an alternative to these things, along with some other women, where did a sort of collective thing, based even less on Inipi. Still, I was young and ignorant, and once I learned more about the traditions and views of Native peoples, I stopped even doing those. 

In more recent years, I got pulled into an effort to see if we could reconstruct a more authentic, Gaelic sweat ceremony, based on the actual fragments we have, additional archaelogical reconstructions, and comparisons to surviving Latvian sauna ceremonies. At first I was game. But, to my great dismay, I discovered the main person I was collaborating with just wanted to find "Celtic" ways of doing Inipi. She didn't care that the surviving fulachtai fia sites, and stone sweathouses, do not have holes in the center for rocks, as well as other details you posted above that differentiate them from Inipis. Like the Birmingham crew, she came at it with the expectation we'd find "Celtic Inipi", and so ignored whatever contradicted this, and exploited what few similarities there are, including wanting to alter things to better fit her preconceptions.

Due to her insistence on appropriating Lakota ceremonies (http://erynn999.livejournal.com/250303.html?thread=1724095#t1724095 ), I won't be collaborating with her in the future, and am dismayed I ever trusted her (we even co-authored a book together). Much to my horror, she is now using some of my research, and even things I stupidly told her, as a point of comparison, about Inipi and Sauna. It was, and is, a heartbreaking situation.

What I have seen over and over with this stuff is that people who want to rip off Inipi think it's somehow ok if they can call it by a term used by another "white" culture. But ripping off and misrepresenting Gaelic cultures isn't cool, either. More of our stuff is public, and in order to rebuild things we've had to share more publicly than I'd like, but that doesn't mean people can make stuff up and call it Gaelic or Celtic. And it's certainly not ok for them to do that and think that tossing a tartan blanket over a sweatlodge makes it ok to rip off First Nations ceremonies. When they do that, all they show is their blatant ignorance of the cultures of the First Nations, as well as those of the Celtic Nations.