The aurochs, nature worship and exploitation in eastern Gaul

The aurochs, nature worship andexploitation in eastern GaulAnnie Grant1 & Eberhard Sauer2

The unusual assemblage of aurochs horn cores from the baths of Bourbonne-les-Bains suggestsvotive deposits. But were they? The authors describe the assemblage, date it to the later Roman toearly medieval period, discuss its possible environmental and ritual connotations, but also raisethe possibility that it relates to craft-workers making use of the hot water supply to work the horn.

Keywords: Gaul, Roman, early medieval, votive deposit, horn-working, aurochs

Aurochs horn cores at a thermal springThe spa at Bourbonne-les-Bains (Haute-Marne, France) has been used since its foundationaround 11/7 BC to the present day, and is one of the most intensively visited in northernGaul and France. Its 66◦C main spring has yielded the largest votive deposit of Romancoins (over 4500 items) of any spring in northern Gaul or Germany; the implications of thisfind for the history of the area have already been reported (Sauer 1999a, b, 2005). In theimmediate vicinity of this spring was an exceptional collection of finds of a different nature:horn-cores of the now extinct aurochs. The character and meaning of this assemblage formthe subject of this paper.

Very large cattle horn cores, almost certainly deriving from the aurochs, were firstdiscovered at Bourbonne-les-Bains in 1783. They were found within a 7m radius eastof the catchment installation of the hot spring in vaulted rooms that also contained votiveinscriptions dedicated to the spring deities (De Varaigne 1783: 475). In 1859, Dugas deBeaulieu (1862: 60) reported on this find in a lecture to the Societe Imperial des Antiquairesde France, and noted that several cores with a circumference at the base of up to 0.34m(close to our own measurements) were in the Bourbonne-les-Bains town hall. Eighteenfurther cores were found in 1875 within the Roman bath-house approximately 20-40m tothe west of the spring (Figure 1; Causard 1878: 38; Renard 1877: 333). Eighteen horn coresand the tip of another are currently housed in the Bourbonne-les-Bains museum. It may besignificant, or merely coincidence, that their number, excluding the small fragment, exactlymatches the number recorded from the 1875 interventions. However, the extant collectionmay include some of those found in 1783. Despite uncertainty about the precise time andlocation of their discovery, there can be no doubt that they derive from the vicinity of thespring as they are heavily impregnated with calcium carbonate; this was also noted in the

1 University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK (Email: [email protected])2 School of History and Classics, University of Edinburgh, David Hume Tower, George Square, Edinburgh, EH8

9JX, UK (Email: [email protected])

Received: 7 June 2004; Accepted: 10 October 2004; Revised: 17 January 2005

antiquity 80 (2006): 622–637

622

Res

earc

h

Annie Grant & Eberhard Sauer

Figure 1. The findspots of the aurochs horn cores within the bath-house at Bourbonne-les-Bains. S = spring, A = aurochshorn cores discovered in 1783, B = aurochs horn cores discovered in 1875 (approx. findspot). Plan reproduced from Thevenard1996: 135: fig. 71 by kind permission of Professor Michel Provost.

early sources (Daubree 1875: 472). There are no postcranial cattle bones in the Bourbonnecollection, nor were any such finds noted at the time of excavation.

Aurochs (Bos primigenius Bojanus) or wild cattle (Figure 2) are an ancestor ofEuropean domestic cattle (Bos taurus Linne), and were ultimately replaced by the smallerdomestic form. Aurochs bones are quite frequently recorded as a component of Europeanarchaeological assemblages up until the Bronze Age, but in common with the bones ofother wild species, they then become increasingly infrequent finds. Although not extinct inheavily forested areas of temperate continental Europe until the early seventeenth century(Guintard 1999: 7-8 with fig. 1), their remains are rare in Roman contexts. Thus despiteour confidence that the horn cores had been recovered from the spa, it was important toverify both their identification to species and their date. We were fortunate to receive agrant from NERC to cover ten C14 analyses; samples for analysis were taken and a physicalexamination made during a visit to the Bourbonne-les-Bains museum in 2001.

Description of the assemblageThe collection housed in the museum today comprises twelve right and seven left cores.Although most of the cores had suffered some damage, probably post-excavation, (Figure 3),they were all in fairly good condition. They varied in colour from off-white to light brown,perhaps reflecting the extent of their exposure to the thermal waters. It was possible to

623

The aurochs, nature worship and exploitation in eastern Gaul

Figure 2. Picture by Smith (1827: facing p. 411; cf. 416-17) of a Polish aurochs bull based on a lost early sixteenth-centuryoriginal (prior to the extinction of the species) he saw at Augsburg (Germany). It is mostly considered to be a realisticrepresentation (Uerpmann 1999: 97; Guintard 1999: 17) though some think it is a regional variety of wild long-hornedcattle (Voros 1985: 214-16; Pyle 1994: 282-3).

measure the maximum and minimum basal diameters and the basal circumferences of 14of the cores (see von den Driesch 1976). Accurate measurement of the maximum lengthof the core along the outer curvature was only possible for one core, but the length of afurther two could be estimated to an accuracy of +−5mm. For 12 other cores an estimationof approximate length was made on the basis of close comparison of the surviving fragmentswith other more complete cores in the collection. The measurements taken are summarisedin Table 1.

The cores are all of a similar curvature and torsion (see Figures 3 and 4), although theirbasal shapes range from rounded to slightly oval. This shape is indicated in Table 1 bythe basal index, calculated by expressing the minimum basal diameter as a proportion ofthe maximum diameter; the indices range from 0.67 (the most ovoid) to 0.83 (the mostrounded). The basal shape of the most ovoid core (no. 3) was slightly more angular thanthat of the rest. This core is also the smallest of the collection although there was one othercore of similar size (no. 11) that is more rounded in shape.

The surface texture of the cores varies in respect of its smoothness. The surface of themajority was quite rough and marked by deep grooves, while six of the cores had rathersmoother surfaces; some of these latter are also grooved (Figures 3 and 4). The greatest rangeof variation is in size, both in respect of overall length and circumference. Figures 3 and 4

624

Res

earc

h


Figure 3. Horn cores from Bourbonne-les-Bain. From top to bottom: nos. 2, 6, 16, 17 and 4 (scale: 3 × 100mm).

illustrate the range of sizes represented; the horn core of a domestic animal (Bos taurus L.),also found in the museum collection but of unknown provenance, is included in Figure 4for comparative purposes.

Sexual dimorphism is particularly marked in the horn cores of aurochs (Chaix & Arbogast1999; Grigson 1975: 117) with length and robustness both related to sex, although size isalso age-related. The 19 Bourbonne cores fall into three distinct size groups: there are 15very large and robust specimens that are unambiguously from mature aurochs bulls; twothat are significantly smaller (nos 3 and 11); and two of intermediate size. Figure 5 plotsthe minimum and maximum basal diameters of the 14 Bourbonne cores on which bothmeasurements could be taken. The figure also includes 12 aurochs cores from a range ofother European sites, and 58 domestic cattle horn cores from Roman contexts at Rottweil,210 kilometres east of Bourbonne-les-Bains (Kokabi 1982: 34-5). The figure shows twomajor size groups: a coherent group that includes all the smaller Rottweil domestic animals,

625

The

aurochs,naturew

orshipand

exploitationin

easternG

aulTable 1. Description and measurements of Bos (sp.) horn cores from the spa at Bourbonne-les-Bains

Ref. Left/ Maximum Minimum Basal Date AD Date ADno. Right Sex Length diameter diameter Circumference index Date BP (68.2%) (95.4%) Butchery

1 R male est. 700 121 94 339 0.78 sample failed possible2 R male c. 710 115 92 328 0.80 sample failed yes3 R small female/ c. 350 c. 79 53 214 0.67 1557 +− 32 435-540 425-600 yes

large domestic male4 R male >180 125 95 365 0.76 sample failed probable5 R small male/large female est. 450 100 70 282 0.70 1660 +− 33 340-430 255-530 yes6 R male 610 c. 107 89 315 0.83 1634 +− 32 355-530 340-535 yes7 L small male/large female est. 450 97 73 270 0.75 1586 +− 30 425-535 410-545 yes8 L male est. 700 113 86 320 0.76 1639 +− 30 345-530 260-535 probable9 L male est. 600 est.105 90 est. 325 – sample failed [broken]

10 L male est. 600 111 89 314 0.80 1610 +− 32 410-535 385-540 yes11 L small female/ est. 350 79 59 225 0.75 not sampled yes

large domestic male12 L male >480 – – – – not sampled yes13 L male est. 700 c. 113 85 315 0.75 not sampled probable14 R male est. 630 – – – – not sampled yes15 R male est. 580 – – – – not sampled yes16 R male >600 c. 116 94 330 0.81 not sampled yes17 R male est. 700 118 96 345 0.81 not sampled yes18 R male est. 700 – – – – not sampled yes19 R ? male tip only – – – – not sampled [broken]

Key. Length: total length taken along the outer curvature of the core; maximum and minimum diameters and circumference taken at base of core; basal index: minimum basaldiameter/ maximum basal diameter.Estimated measurements of damaged cores are given to three levels of accuracy: c. indicates that the measurement given is accurate to +−5mm (lengths) or to +−2mm (other dimensions);est. indicates a measurement calculated conservatively on the basis of close comparison of the surviving fragment with other more complete cores in the collection; > indicates thelength taken of the surviving fragment.All measurements are in millimetres.Radiocarbon samples: 3 = OxA-10939, d13C =−22.6, 5 = OxA-10940, d13C =−21.2, 6 = OxA-10941, d13C = −22.0, 7 = OxA-10942, d13C =−22.8, 8 = OxA-10943,d13C = −21.7 and 10 = OxA-10944, d13C =−22.1. The radiocarbon determinations are of ultrafiltered gelatin extracted from the bones using the methods outlined by BronkRamsey et al. (2000: 459-60; kind information by Dr Tom Higham).

626

Res

earc

h


Figure 4. Horn cores from Bourbonne-les-Bain showing the range of sizes in the collection. From top to bottom: nos. 2, 5,and 3; a horn core of a domestic animal (Bos taurus L.) of unknown provenance from the museum collection is included forcomparative purposes (scale: 3 × 100mm).

and a more dispersed group that includes the majority of the aurochs from the comparatorsites and the Bourbonne cores. The two smallest Bourbonne cores (nos 3 and 11) and afemale aurochs core from Hessens fall within the size range of the largest of the domesticanimals; a core from Zalavar lies on the edge of the Rottweil distribution.

There is known to be an overlap in size between large domestic bulls and smallfemale aurochs and thus two possibilities present themselves: that the Bourbonne coresof intermediate size are those of female or younger male aurochs and the smallest cores thoseof large domestic bulls; or that the smallest cores are those of small and/or young femaleaurochs and the intermediate-sized cores from either large females or smaller/younger males.The possible ratio of male to female aurochs horn cores from Bourbonne thus ranges from15:4, 17:2 or 15:2; a clear dominance of males is indicated whatever the status of the smallerspecimens (Table 1).

627


Figure 5. Plot of maximum and minimum basal diameters of 14 Bourbonne-les-Bains cores, aurochs cores from Ullerslev(Mesolithic Denmark: Degerbøl & Fredskild 1970), Kecel-Rozsaberek (Mesolithic Hungary: Voros 1987), Hessens (ninth tothirteenth century Germany: Voros 1985) Spandau (tenth to eleventh century Germany: Voros 1985) and Zalavar (earlymedieval Hungary: Voros 1985), and 58 domestic cattle cores from Rottweil (c. first – third century AD: Kokabi 1982:32-6. Measurements published in a later report (Kokabi 1988: 133-5) on this site are not included as they all fall withinthe range shown. Measurements of the horn cores of an aurochs skeleton found in a Roman well were not given in the report(Kokabi 1988: 201-3)).

Thirteen of the Bourbonne cores have cut marks at the base of the core, indicatingdeliberate separation from the skull (see Figure 6). In the others, breakage, possibly post-deposition, had damaged the relevant area, but a further three had almost certainly been cutat the base and another may have been cut; for none of the cores was there evidence thatthey had not been cut from the skull. Some of the cuts had left a fairly neat edge around thebase of the core, but in others both cuts and broken edges were visible at the base, and someof the cuts showed that several attempts had been made to sever the core in a fairly roughfashion.

Cut marks were found in other positions on horn core 2 (a small cut across the corec. 45mm below the tip of the core) and horn core 5 (a diagonal cut at approximately the midpoint of the core’s length). The possible significance of this butchery is further discussedbelow.

The date of the horn coresThe coin series from the spring (Figure 7) and the history of the bath-house, which wasrebuilt on a grand scale some time between AD 50 and 150 (Figure 1), suggests that thespa flourished from the late first century BC to the third century when it went into decline.Coin offerings in the fourth century are very sporadic and parts of the building had by then

628

Res

earc

h


Figure 6. Aurochs horn core (no. 2) showing butchery cuts at base (scale: 10 × 10mm).

become dilapidated (Sauer 2005: 58). Our original assumption was thus that the horn coresdated to the period of peak activity prior to the third-century decline. Ten horn cores weresampled and a radiocarbon date established for six of them (cores 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10; too littleorganic matter survived in the other four).

To our surprise all six datable specimens post-dated the mid-third century (Figure 7and Table 1). The maximum date range (95.4 per cent probability) is AD 255 to 600;the 68.2 per cent probability dates reduce this to AD 340 to 540. There is an overlapin the 68.2 per cent date ranges of the six cores at c. AD 430/435 so we cannot excludethe possibility that they were all deposited on a single occasion but this is statisticallyunlikely. The four cores sampled for which dates could not be determined (cores 1, 2,4 and 9; Table 1) are the four with the largest circumference at the base out of the tensampled specimens and this raises the possibility that these may be from a physically larger

629


6 lines on the right: date of the samples from Bourbonne-les-Bains(bottom lines: 95.4%, top lines: 68.2% probability):

1 = horn core 3, 2 = hc5, 3 = hc6, 4 = hc7, 5 = hc8, 6 = hc10Thick graph: offerings in the spring (scale: 1 = 1coin/year, 5 = 5c/y, 10 = over 300c/y)

Figure 7. Dates of the horn cores from the vicinity of the spring and other datable offerings, mainly coins, deposited in thespring. Note that there is just a single datable sixth-century object from the spring, a brooch (not counting a Merovingianring).

Figure 8. Copper alloy clasp in the shape of cattle bucranium, almost certainly from the excavations in 1874/75 in the springand bath-house at Bourbonne. Photo of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris; reproduced by kind permission.

population of earlier date whose longer exposure to chemical reactions in the hot mineralwater had destroyed all organic material. However, without further evidence we must assumethat the date range obtained from the six cores is likely to be typical of the collection as awhole.

A further find should also be mentioned in this context. There is a small (22 × 11 × 2mm)copper alloy clasp with two symmetrical hooks, the design of which seems likely to havebeen inspired by a cattle bucranium (the upper part of the skull including the horns), kepttoday in the Bibliotheque National in Paris (Figure 8). The object, which may have beenused to hold the sides of a cloak (or possibly the two ends of a necklace) together, is notlisted in any of the reports about the early excavations at Bourbonne, but its storage in a tray

630

Res

earc

h


otherwise containing only objects listed in the early reports about the 1874/75 excavations(most of which derive from within the spring) and the absence of patina (typical of findsfrom the spring and its vicinity) leave little doubt that it derives from Bourbonne, and verypossibly from the spring itself. Parallels from Gaul (Fouet 1963) and the Iberian Peninsula(Alarcao et al. 1979: 143-4 and pl. XXXIV no. 229; cf. Moutinho Alarcao 2000: 135no. 411.1) suggest a date between the fourth and the seventh century, the period duringwhich most or all of the aurochs horn cores were deposited in the ruins of the bath-house.While its casual loss cannot be ruled out with certainty, a sixth-century brooch and aMerovingian finger ring, as well as several similar personal objects of early or high imperialdate, were also found in the spring or waterlogged deposits nearby. These finds suggest thatspring veneration and the ritual deposition of dress accessories continued from the Romanperiod into the early Middle Ages. The bucranium-like design of the clasp may be no morethan coincidental, but it is possible that its deposition may be related to that of the aurochshorn cores; this is discussed further below.

Nature worship?The intentional deposition of a highly symbolic and visible part of a large wild animal in thevicinity of a venerated spring in which coins had been deposited during previous centuries isstrongly suggestive of a ritual act. The sacrifice of animals, in particular of domestic bulls, waswidespread in the Roman period. However, in the absence of post-cranial elements, it seemsmore likely that we are dealing with trophies brought to the spring sanctuary than with thesacrifice of aurochs at the spa itself. This suggests that the species was hunted in this region,and also that the animal, and its horns in particular, had a specific ritual significance. Cattlehorns have symbolic significance in many contemporary and past cultures from prehistorictimes onwards and in many parts of the world: for example, cattle bucrania were placedaround tumuli in prehistoric Sudan (Grant 2001) and aurochs horns and bucrania in templecontexts in Bronze Age Syria (Vila 1993). Horns were a particularly common motif in Celticart (for example Green 1992: figs 4.16, 6.6, 6.7), and the slaughter of large bulls is alsodepicted (for example on the Gundestrup cauldron: Green 1992: figs 5.1, 5.3). The skullsof bulls are also found in Iron Age ritual contexts (for example at Gournay-sur-Aronde:Meniel 1989: fig. 6; Brunaux et al. 1985), although deposits of horn cores are not usual inIron Age Europe (Green 1992).

The finds may thus provide evidence of how two powerful natural phenomena, one of thehottest thermal springs and one of the largest European Holocene mammals were broughttogether in religious or ritual acts. Diana Abnoba, the goddess of the Black Forest, was boththe patroness of wildlife and hunting and of the hot springs of Badenweiler (Heinz 1982;Wiegels 1982), and we may suspect that the power of Borvo and Damona, the divine pairresiding over the hot springs at Bourbonne (Troisgros 1975), equally extended over thesurrounding countryside. The place where steaming hot water came to the surface was thusperhaps seen as an appropriate place to record thanks for hunting success in the surroundingenvironment, or to make appeasement to nature. Written testimonies leave no doubt thatvarious forms of nature veneration continued for generations and often centuries after the

631


government of the Western Empire and its successor states had converted to Christianity.Yet, a specific ritual of depositing aurochs horn cores at a spring would be unique of its kind,not only in this late period, but also in a wider chronological context; a deposit of cattlehorn cores from the spring basin at Argenton-sur-Creuse-St-Marcel (Bourgeois 1972: 71;1991: 183-4) is the only related case. We might then imagine a deliberate seeking out ofthese animals, with a clear preference for males, in the surrounding countryside. Followingtheir slaughter, the removal of their horns and cores from the skull and perhaps the butcheryand consumption of the carcass may have taken place at the kill site, followed later by thecelebratory deposition of the horns within the spa complex.

This ritual may have been practised only occasionally, and over a period of time,perhaps related to specific events. The bucranium clasp may have been offered in orderto replace symbolically a real hunting trophy, and if the two smallest cores are indeedfrom large domestic rather than wild cattle, again they may also have served as substi-tutes.

Human impact on the environmentThe causes of the increasing scarcity of finds of aurochs bones in archaeologicalcontexts from the late Neolithic onwards undoubtedly include as principal factors humanchoice (the increasing importance of animal husbandry versus animal hunting for meatprocurement) and environmental change, in particular forest clearance. The Roman periodwas characterised by massive deforestation in some of the northern territories, includingadjacent south-west Germany, as shown by pollen profiles, accelerated erosion, floodsuprooting old trees in areas not previously affected by flooding and increasing scarcityof the best building timbers (Kuhnen 1992: 36-9; 71-81). Deforestation may have reachedits peak in the early third century when detachments of woodcutters were operating in thelow mountain ranges at or even beyond the frontiers of the Empire in Germany (CIL XIII:6618; 6623; Nesselhauf & Lieb 1959: no. 151). This, together with agricultural expansion,must have resulted in a significant reduction of a habitat for wild animals. Hunting formeat (King 1999: 147-8) and the use of their horns as signal instruments (Marx 1896)will have further reduced their numbers. Aurochs remains reported to have been discoveredin the amphitheatres of Metz (Keune 1902: 422-7) and Windisch (Haller 1812: 391) alsosuggest exploitation of the species for mass entertainment as a, probably cheaper, alternativeto exotic animals. Despite the lack of detail in the early reports, it seems unlikely that thelarge horn cores would have been confused with those of domestic cattle or that the boneswere deposited for reasons other than slaughter of aurochs in the arena. This assumptionis supported by the widespread killing of related animals such as bulls and bison in publicspectacles (Toynbee 1973: 148-51; Junkelmann 2000: figs 34; 83). Deschler-Erb’s systematicanalysis of Roman animal bones in southern Germany and the northern Alps (2001) hassuggested that in this area the species only survived in some remote retreats. Hungarianassemblages of Roman date equally show a decrease in the proportion of aurochs bones incomparison with the preceding period, even though it is unclear to what extent the resultsmay have been distorted by a cultural bias towards domestic animals (Bartosiewicz 1999:111-2).

632

Res

earc

h


The second half of the third century was marked by long phases of warfare and insecurity,economic crisis and, at least in parts of the Empire, epidemics; to judge by archaeologicalevidence, this period saw a significant decline in human population in eastern Gaul thataffected remote sites particularly severely (Sauer 2005: 57-8). It seems likely that thiswould have led to a regeneration of some of the natural habitat suitable for aurochs andthus perhaps to a re-colonisation or a population increase. No less than four independentsources (Agathias 1,4; Greg. Tur., Franc. 10,10; Ionas 1,10; Ven. Fort. 7,4) attest thatthere was a large population of aurochs or that they were hunted by the kings of thedivided Frankish kingdom in the Vosges and adjacent regions in eastern Gaul, includingthe area of Luxeuil, during the sixth century. All four sources, incidentally, stress specificallythat the forests within this area formed the natural habitat of these animals; this is anunusually high number of textual references in comparison with those referring to other,similarly sized regions (Gerard 1871: 388-406; Keller 1887: 56-61). Since all horn coresat Bourbonne appear to have been deposited after the mid-third century, the change inritual may well have been made possible by a population increase or by a re-colonisation ofthe thinly populated area of the Vosges and their foothills in eastern Gaul by this animalspecies.

A purely ritual interpretation, however, might be challenged on the basis of the coinevidence. Had, as at many other springs, coin offerings continued on a significant scale toaround AD 400 when coin supply to the northern provinces of the Empire by and largeceased, then it might have been tempting to conclude that the shift from man-made tonatural offerings was forced upon the worshippers by an increasing scarcity of coins. Yetat Bourbonne the sharp numerical decrease in coin offerings pre-dates the decline in coinproduction and at least some of the horns seem to have been deposited while there werestill plenty of coins in circulation. By contrast, at Bornheim-Roisdorf, after Bourbonne-les-Bains the largest coin assemblage from a spring in northern Gaul and Germany, coinofferings reach a distinctive peak in the fourth century and late antique coins are equallywell represented in a high proportion of other votive deposits from springs in this area andelsewhere in the Empire (Sauer 2005: 58, 110-16). It is tempting to conclude that a newritual arose in response to a significant change in the local environment around the thirdcentury related to a decline in the local human population and a resulting expansion of thewild animal population. However we must also explore a further possible interpretation ofthese finds.

Horn workingHorn has been used extensively as a raw material in the past to make both useful anddecorative objects. The natural shape of the horn has often been exploited for drinking andblast horns, but horn is a plastic material that can be softened and then either flattened ormoulded into other shapes to make a wide range of objects. The full extent of the Romanuse of this material is obscured by its poor survival in most depositional contexts, but findsof horn cores that are suggestive of horn working activities are common in Roman and alsolater contexts (see, for example, MacGregor 1985). The horn in the live animal consists ofthe inner bony extension of the skull (the horn core), a membrane and the outer keratinous

633


horn; this latter has to be removed from the core prior to further processing, but first thecore with its sheath attached are separated from the skull, frequently leaving characteristiccut marks on the base of the core like those noted on the majority of the Bourbonne cores(for example Figure 6).

Critical to the working of horn, including the removal of the horn sheath from thecore, is heat and water; for example, Diderot’s 1768 encyclopaedia of trades and industryshows a horn workshop with horns being softened in a cauldron over a fire (Gillispie 1959:pl. 455). The possibility that the natural source of hot water and steamy conditions inthe spa might have been exploited for horn working must thus be considered, particularlyas the archaeological evidence suggests that in the period of the most likely deposition ofthe cores, the buildings had fallen into disrepair and the earlier ritual of coin depositionhad sharply declined. The huge horns of the aurochs would have provided materialsunmatched by those of domestic animals; an intact horn from one of the largest of theBourbonne animals, at over 700mm, would have provided a very significant and valuableresource.

There is another example of a museum find of aurochs horn cores that was reportedonly a few years ago, in this case from Vac in Hungary (Bartosiewicz 1997). One of theVac cores has distinctive cut marks: the published photographs show a neatly squared-offbase (Bartosiewicz 1997: figs 1 and 3), and Bartosiewicz suggested that the horns wereevidence of a prestige craft activity. He originally favoured a medieval date; more recentlyradiocarbon dating has shown them to be of Iron Age date (Bartosiewicz 2005). The cutmarks on the Vac core differ in detail from those on the Bourbonne cores, particularlyin the use of a saw on the former. In the late Iron Age and Roman periods saws aremore frequently used for horn and bone working (for example at Rottweil: Kokabi 1982:fig. 12) than for butchery, but knives and heavier chopping tools are also used for craftactivities in these periods. Like the Vac core, some of the Bourbonne cores have beencut very neatly at the base, although others appear to have been partly broken from theskull. Two cores had other cuts on their surface, which also argues for horn removal andworking.

A further factor that might support an argument that the spa finds are craft waste ratherthan ritual deposits is the very fact that the cores had been removed from the skull. Bycontrast, on the clasp the horns are depicted still attached to the frontal bone. Many of thesymbolic deposits and representations of cattle horns, particularly from prehistoric times,include at least part of the skull to form the characteristic bucranium. However, removal ofthe horn from the skull does not necessarily imply the presence of a craft activity and theirseparation from the slaughtered animal may have been in itself a ritual act. The horn sheathsin either a worked or an unworked state may have been the magnificent and very valuableobjects of ritual deposition (now long since decayed), and the cores a reminder of theacts.

ConclusionsWas this ritual deposition or craft activities to produce display items? The evidence isequivocal, and not necessarily mutually exclusive, although on balance, perhaps stronger

634

Res

earc

h


for the former. Whatever their interpretation, the aurochs horn cores from Bourbonne-les-Bains are remarkable finds, providing evidence of a significant late antique interest in,and exploitation of, these animals during a period when the slaughter of wild animals toprovide a more than very occasional component in the food supply had all but ceased. Sucha concentration of finds at a single site argues for a rare, if not unique, activity not otherwiserecorded for the Roman and early medieval periods.

AcknowledgementsWe are indebted to Mr Henri Troisgros, the director of the museum, for enabling us to carry out this study,to NERC for a grant for ten radiocarbon dates via the NERC-ORADS radiocarbon dating programme, andto Dr Tom Higham (RLAHA, University of Oxford) for carrying out the dating. One of us (ES) wrote hiscontribution while holding a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship.

Abbreviations and sourcesAgathias, Historiae.CIL = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.Greg. Tur., Franc. = Gregorius Turonensis, Historia Francorum.Ionas, Vita Columbani abbatis discipulorumque eius.Ven. Fort. = Venantius Fortunatus, Carmina.

ReferencesAlarcao, J., R. Etienne, A. Moutinho Alarcao &

S. Da Ponte. 1979. Fouilles de Conimbriga VII.Paris: E. de Boccard.

Bartosiewicz, L. 1997. A horn worth blowing? A strayfind of aurochs from Hungary. Antiquity 71:1007-10.

–1999. Aurochs (Bos primigenius Bojanus, 1827) in theHolocene of Hungary, in G.-C. Weniger (ed.)Archaeology and Biology of the Aurochs: 103-17.Koln: Neanderthal Museum.

–2005. Better late than never: Iron Age aurochs remainsfrom Hungary. Antiquity 79:http://antiquity.ac.uk/ProjGall/bartosiewicz/index.html.

Bourgeois, C. 1972. La fontaine d’Argentomagus.Bulletin de la Societe Nationale des Antiquaires deFrance 1972: 61-72.

–1991. Divona I. Divinites et ex-voto du culteGallo-Romain de l’eau. Paris: De Boccard.

Bronk Ramsey, C., P.B. Pettitt, R.E.M. Hedges,G.W.L. Hodgins & D.C. Owen. 2000.Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS system:Archaeometry Datelist 30. Archaeometry 42.2:459-79.

Brunaux, J.-L., P. Meniel & F. Poplin. 1985. Gournay1, les Fouilles sur le Sanctuaire et l’Oppidum(1975-1984). Amiens: Revue Archeologique dePicardie.

Causard, A. 1878. Bourbonne et ses eaux minerales,2nd edn. Paris: J.-B. Bailliere.

Chaix, L. & R.-M. Arbogast. 1999. Holoceneaurochs from Western Europe: osteometrical data,in G.-C. Weniger (ed.) Archaeology and Biology ofthe Aurochs: 35-48. Koln: Neanderthal Museum.

Daubree, M.F. 1875. Formation contemporaine dediverses especes minerales cristallisees dans la sourcethermale de Bourbonne-les-Bains. Annales desMines 7eme Ser., 8: 439-84.

Degerbøl, M. & B. Fredskild. 1970. The Urus (Bosprimigenius Bojanus) and neolithic domesticatedcattle (Bos taurus domesticus Linne) in Denmark.Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes SelskabBiologiske Skrifter 17,1: 1-177.

Deschler-Erb, S. 2001. Vici und Villen im Elchtest –Archaozoologische Aussagemoglichkeiten bei der Fragenach der Intensitat menschlicher Eingriffe in dieNordalpine Naturlandschaft zur Romerzeit,in M. Frey & N. Hanel (ed.) Archaologie,Naturwissenschaft, Umwelt: 47-58. BARInternational Series 929. Oxford: BAR.

De Varaigne, B. 1783. Proces-verbal des travauxentrepris par M. le compte d’Avaux aux bains eteaux minerales de Bourbonne-les-Bains, inE. Bougard (ed.) 1866, Bibliotheca Borvoniensis ouEssai de Bibliographie et d’Histoire: 469-92.Chaumont & Paris: Aubry.

635


Dugas De Beaulieu, J.-L. 1862. Memoire sur lesantiquites de Bourbonne-les-Bains. Memoires de laSociete Imperiale des Antiquaires de France 25:57-84.

Fouet, G. 1963. Agrafes a double crochet du IVeme

siecle dans la Villa de Montmaurin(Haute-Garonne). Celticum VI. Actes du TroisiemeColloque International d’Etudes Gauloises, Celtiqueset Protoceltiques, Chateaumeillant-Bourges(Cher), 27-30 Juillet 1962, Rennes:277-92.

Gerard, C. 1871. Essai d’une faune historique desmammiferes sauvages de l’Alsace. Colmar:E. Barth.

Gillispie, C. (ed.). 1959. A Diderot PictorialEncylopedia of Trades and Industry, Volume Two.New York: Dover.

Grant, A. 2001. The animal remains, in D.A. Welsby(ed.) Life on the Desert Edge. Seven thousand years ofsettlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan:544-55. Sudan Archaeological Research SocietyPublication 7. London: Sudan ArchaeologicalResearch Society.

Green, M. 1992. Animals in Celtic Life and Myth.London: Routledge.

Grigson, C. 1975. The craniology and relationships offour species of Bos. II. Basic craniology: Bos taurusL. proportions and angles. Journal of ArchaeologicalScience 2: 109-28.

Guintard, C. 1999. On the size of the ure-ox or theaurochs, in G.-C. Weniger (ed.) Archaeology andBiology of the Aurochs: 7-21. Koln: NeanderthalMuseum.

Haller, F.L. 1812. Helvetien unter den Romern II.Suhr: Typographische Buchhandlung.

Heinz, W. 1982. Der Diana Abnoba-Altar inBadenweiler. Antike Welt 13.4: 37-41.

Junkelmann, M. 2000. Familia Gladiatoria, inE. Kohne & C. Ewigleben (ed.) Gladiators andCaesars. London: British Museum Press: 31-74.

Keller, O. 1887. Thiere des classischen Alterthums inculturgeschichtlicher Beziehung. Innsbruck: Wagner.

Keune, J.B. 1902. Das grosse romische Amphitheaterzu Metz. Die Einzelfunde. Jahr-Buch der Gesellschaftfur lothringische Geschichte und Altertumskunde14: 376-430.

King, A. 1999. Animals and the Roman army: theevidence of animal bones, in A.K. Goldsworthy &I. Haynes (ed.) The Roman Army as a community inpeace and war: 139-49. Michigan: JRA Suppl.Ser. 34.

Kokabi, M. 1982. Arae Flaviae II. Viehhaltung und Jagdim romischen Rottweil. Stuttgart: Konrad TheissVerlag.

–1988. Viehhaltung und Jagd im romischen Rottweil,in M. Klee, M. Kokabi & E. Nuber (ed.) AraeFlaviae IV: 105-234. Stuttgart: Konrad TheissVerlag.

Kuhnen, E. (ed.). 1992. Gesturmt, geraumt, vergessen?Der Limesfall und das Ende der Romerherrschaft inSudwestdeutschland. Stuttgart: WurttembergischesLandesmuseum.

MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Ivory and Horn.Beckenham: Croom Helm.

Marx, A. 1896. Auerochs, in Pauly’s Real-Encyclopadieder Classischen Altertumswissenschaft II.2: 2286-7.Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler.

Meniel, P. 1989. Les animaux dans les practiquesreligieuses des Gaulois, in P. Meniel (ed.)L’Animal dans les Practiques Religieuses: lesManifestations Materielles: 87-97. Paris:Anthropozoologica.

Moutinho Alarcao, A. 2000. Museo Monografico deConimbriga: Catalogue. Lisbon: Ministerio daCultura.

Nesselhauf, H. & H. Lieb. 1959. Dritter Nachtrag zuCIL. XIII. Berichte der Romisch-GermanischenKommission 40: 120-229.

Pyle, C.M. 1994. Some late sixteenth-centurydepictions of the aurochs. Archives of NaturalHistory 21.3: 275-88.

Renard, A. 1877. Bourbonne. Son nom – ses origines –ses antiquites gallo-romaines – ses etablissementsthermaux – son ancien chateau et sa seigneurie.Memoires de la Societe historique et archeologique deLangres 2.11: 309-38.

Sauer, E. 1999a. The Augustan army spa atBourbonne-les-Bains, in A.K. Goldsworthy & I.Haynes (ed.) The Roman Army as a community inpeace and war: 52-79. Michigan: JRA Suppl.Ser. 34.

–1999b. The Augustan coins from Bourbonne-les-Bains (Haute-Marne). Revue Numismatique154: 145-82.

–2005. Coins, Cult and Cultural identity: Augustan coins,hot springs and the early Roman baths atBourbonne-les-Bains. Leicester ArchaeologyMonograph 10. Leicester: Leicester UniversityPress.

Smith, C.H. 1827. Supplement to the OrderRuminantia, in G. Cuvier (ed.) The AnimalKingdom IV: 33-428. London: G.B. Whittaker.

Thevenard, J.-J. with A. Villes & R. Neiss. 1996.Carte Archeologique de la Gaule 52/1. LaHaute-Marne. Paris: Academie des Inscriptions etBelles-Lettres.

Toynbee, J.M.C. 1973. Animals in Roman Life andArt. London & Southampton: Thames & Hudson.

636

Res

earc

h


Troisgros, H. 1975. Borvo et Damona. DivinitesGallo-Romaines des eaux thermales. Bourbonne-les-Bains: Association des Amis du vieuxBourbonne.

Uerpmann, H.-P. 1999. Der Ruckzucht-Auerochse undsein ausgestorbenes Vorbild, in G.-C. Weniger (ed.)Archaeology and Biology of the Aurochs: 93-102.Koln: Neanderthal Museum.

Vila, E. 1993. A propos de vestiges de chevilles osseusesd’aurochs retrouvees a Tell Chura (Bronze ancien,Syrie): un example possible de chasse a vocationpremiere non alimentaire, in J. Desse & F.Audoin-Rouzeau (ed.) Exploitation des AnimauxSauvages a Travers le Temps: 279-92. Juan-les-Pins:Editions APDCA.

von den Driesch, A. 1976. A guide to the Measurementof Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites.Cambridge (MA): Peabody Museum ofArchaeology and Ethnology.

Voros, I. 1985. Early medieval aurochs (Bosprimigenius Boj.) and his extinction in Hungary.Folia Archaeologica 36: 193-219.

–1987. An aurochs (Bos primigenius Boj.) skeleton fromthe mesolithic peat-bogs at Kecel-Rozsaberek.Folia Archaeologica 38: 65-88.

Wiegels, R. 1982. Die Inschrift auf dem DianaAbnoba-Altar aus Badenweiler. Antike Welt 13.4:41-3.

637

The aurochs, nature worship and exploitation in eastern Gaul

Documents

Transcript of The aurochs, nature worship and exploitation in eastern Gaul