Infant Burials on Romano-British Rural Settlement sites

Alice MarshRoman Society Internship 2015

Why I have chosen this project?

• Follow on from my dissertation on Roman childhood, with focus on the Bridges Garage child burial.

• Interest in childhood in Roman Britain which I hope to research further.

• What can these burials on Romano-British farmsteads tell us about Romano-British burial practices and superstitions around infant burials?

Sites researched

The birth of a childDeath during childbirth was common for both mother and baby.

When a baby was born, it must be ‘lifted up’ – accepted by the father.

8/9 days after the birth the baby was named.

Mortality Rates from the Roman Empire

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 900.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Life expectancy (according to Coale-Demeny Level 3, Model West)

Age (years)

Liv

ing

Pop

ulat

ion

(%)

The death of an infant, from the Ancient Literary Sources

• Pliny – “before they cut their first teeth” (Natural History VII. 15)

• Juvenal – “attend an infants burial, one too young for the pyre” (Satire XV 138-40)

• Plutarch – “Neither plant nor animal” (Quaest.Rom.102.228C)

Tewkesbury Hospital, Tewkesbury• Roman rural settlement site

with some high quality farm buildings.

• Enclosure 1 – small square building with rounded corners, typical of a small Roman farmstead enclosure. Not a dwelling.

• Two neonate burials. One found in ditch 2 (37 weeks in utero). The second (40-41 weeks in utero) was crouched within a pit with grave goods.

• Grave goods associated with burial 798 – dish and bowl ‘set’.

Rudgeway Lane, Walton Cardiff, Tewkesbury

• 1 late term foetus, 4 neonate and 1 infant burial.

• Enclosure 3, surrounding a 1st cent AD roundhouse - a flexed inhumation of a neonate, and the upper part of a carinated bowl dating to the mid to late 1st century AD (Burial 13).

• Enclosures functioning as farms. Continuity of occupation on a previous Iron Age site.

• Other evidence of ‘ritualistic’ activity on the site. The well, which contained six almost complete narrowed–rimmed jars and a costrel.

Foxes Field, Stonehouse• Enclosure and trackway.

Evidence inside the enclosure for industrial activities (crop drying oven). Possibly these features could be associated with a villa site nearby.

• 15 burials including 1 neonate inhumation (less than a month old), within the enclosure.

• Evidence on the site for other unusual burials – husband and wife?!

• Buried in a shallow circular pit, within the enclosure.

• Disarticulated skeleton,10% complete, possibly disturbed in antiquity.

Milton Hill North, Milton• Extensive remains of

an iron age settlement; roundhouses, pits and a possible enclosure.

• Deposits in storage pits – two of the pits contained infant burials.

• Both inhumations aged between 0-2 months.

• Other evidence of deposits in pits - inverted pot in pit 2220.

Continuity of practice from Iron Age to Roman?

WHY?

Unique nature of infants

• From the Ancient textual references it is clear that infants were generally different from adult burials in Roman Britain.

• Due to their unique status it was not necessary for them to be buried outside the confines of a settlement, in adult cemeteries.

• Mortality rate was high in childhood – infants between 0-18 months were not considered to have a personna.

• They are buried rather than cremated throughout the whole of the Roman period.

• Infant exposure – we hear of this from the textual sources. Possible way of dealing with unwanted children, would leave little to no trace in the archaeological record.

Possible Theories Associations with buildings and settlements:• Pre-Roman burial of infants in settlements –continuity.• Casual burial within the settlement context – due to the lack of a personna, were

not granted the same burial rites as adults.• Buildings – the infant would bestow good luck onto a new build/venture.

Grave goods:• Indication of status/ concern.

Liminal features/ boundaries:• Marking out different areas of different

character or ownership.• Walls, ditches, boundaries – transitional areas?• Similar ‘ritualsitic’ importance to other finds

commonly associated with the termini of ditches?

Conclusions

• Infants were treated differently to adults in the way that they were treated in death and excluded from certain burial rites.

• Infant inhumations often found within the settlement context.

• The location of these burials is significant and leads us to question the importance of these infants as liminal beings/spiritually important.

• Is this a representative sample? If an infant is exposed how would we find evidence for this? Were these inhumations the norm or are we seeing a false sample?

An anomaly……Hambleden Villa, Buckinghamshire• Possible cases of infanticide?• 97 infant inhumations found, most newly born.• No grave markers.• Could this be an ancient infant cemetery, or as suggested

by some, unwanted infants who were buried in the grounds of a brothel?!

Thank you!! Any questions?

Thank you to Cotswold Archaeology for the use of their publications, images and grey literature reports