Pondering Privies: Construction, Use, Reuse, and Other Speculations About Cesspits in the Archaeological Record

Author:

Smith DavidORCID

Abstract

AbstractShould cesspits be excavated and recorded in detail? In the UK, cesspits often are considered ‘mundane’ and frequently overlooked during excavation or only half-heartedly recorded. This paper explores the biography of cesspits—their construction, use, reuse, and closure/abandonment, as well as their archaeological investigation and interpretation. What does a cesspit look like? How might we better recognise cesspits archaeologically? By exploring modern NGO guidance and high-quality archaeological studies of cesspits and latrines, we can begin to understand something of the common biography of these features. Comparison between the approach to the excavation/recording of cesspits in the USA with that of the UK also may inform our collective approach to these features at any archaeological site. Perhaps our own assumptions and approaches to the archaeological interpretation of these features may be hindering our understanding of their significance as important records of status and societal behaviour? This paper will conclude by exploring the interpretation of cesspits from two different chronological periods in the UK, outlining entirely different approaches to quite similar data.

Funder

University of Birmingham

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Archeology,Archeology

Reference106 articles.

1. Addyman, P. (1989). The archaeology of public health at York. England. World Archaeology, 21, 244–264.

2. Allen, M. J. (1993). Mineralised coprolites and cess. In Woodward, P., Davies S. M., & Graham, A. H. (Eds.), Excavations at Greyhound Yard, Dorchester 1981-1984 (Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society Monograph Series Number 12) (pp. 348), Dorchester: Dorset Natural History and Archaeology Society.

3. Barber, B., & Thomas, C. (2002). The London Charterhouse (Museum of London Archaeology Service Monograph 10). London: Museum of London Archaeology Service.

4. Berggren, A. (2012). The interpretation of depositions in pits. Is it time for the pendulum to swing back? Archaeological Dialogues, 19, 116–120.

5. Bradley, R., & Edmonds, M. (1993). Interpreting the axe trade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3