Hearth and Home: The Burial of Infants within Romano-British Domestic Contexts

Abstract

A recent study by Scott (1991) on the conjunction of infant burial and agricultural processes, and Pearce's work (2001) on the association of infants with boundaries and ditches during the Romano-British period, have highlighted possible symbolic behaviours relating to newborn infants. This paper considers another strand of infant burial practice -the association of neonates with domestic structures and specifi c features within them, including hearths, doorways and hypocausts. Through examination of the placement of the infant within its immediate environment and the material culture represented with this type of burial, possible symbolic concepts embodied in the presence of the infant can be bett er understood.

Perinatal infant death at the Roman villa site at Hambleden, Buckinghamshire, England

“…Motivations included limiting family size, or that the child was not of the desired sex or was deformed (Brunt, 1971: 150;Langer, 1974;Wiedemann, 1989: 37). Secondly, although infant burials are not uncommon in Romano-British domestic contexts (Philpott, 1991: 97;Moore, 2009), Hambleden has yielded the largest number of perinatal burials (said to number 97 by the excavator (Cocks, 1921)) of any Roman site in Britain. The sheer number was noted as remarkable by the excavator, who thought it suggested infanticide with surreptitious disposal of the bodies (Cocks, 1921).…”

The role of infant life histories in the construction of identities in death: An incremental isotope study of dietary and physiological status among children afforded differential burial

“…Their remains may also be placed in forms of burial container exclusive to their age group (Carroll, ; Halcrow, Tayles, & Livingstone, ) or accompanied by different grave goods to adults including esoteric items such as amulets and curated objects (Carroll, ; Kay, ) or items which might be interpreted as toys or playthings (Andrushko, Buzon, Gibaja Oviedo, & Creaser, ; Harlow, ; Martin‐Kilcher, ). In some cases, child‐specific burial rites were provided to most individuals of a certain age at death, as with perinates interred at Romano‐British settlement sites (Moore, ), while, in other cases, only a proportion of children were buried in unusual ways and others received more “adult” treatment. Between the 8th and 12th centuries AD in England, some children who died before the end of their second year are found in burial clusters surrounding church buildings, but others are interred with adults in other parts of the cemetery (Craig‐Atkins, ), highlighting that the decisions behind the provision of child‐specific funerary rites were not based solely on age at death.…”

Essential Tensions: A Framework for Exploring Inequality Through Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology

“…The conceptualization of subadults as social and biological beings distinct from adults is often also visible in the bioarchaeological and mortuary record. In Roman Britain, for example, infants and neonates were excluded from formal burial in community cemeteries, and instead buried in domestic contexts such as hearths, hypocausts or bathhouses (Moore 2009). Similarly, in Anglo-Saxon England children represent only 10-15% of the mortuary population in cremation and inhumation cemeteries, while non-industrial juvenile mortality rates suggest this number should be closer to 50% (Crawford 2000).…”