The Mother-Infant Nexus in Anthropology

Abstract

Post-Medieval London (16 th -19 th centuries) was a stressful environment in which to be poor.Overcrowded and squalid housing, physically demanding and risky working conditions, air and water pollution, inadequate diet, and exposure to infectious diseases created high levels of morbidity and low life expectancy. All of these factors pressed with particular severity on the lowest members of the social strata, with burgeoning disparities in health between the richest and poorest. Fetal, perinatal and infant skeletal remains provide the most sensitive source of bioarchaeological information regarding past population health and in particular maternal wellbeing. This chapter examined evidence for chronic growth and health disruption in 136 fetal, perinatal and infant skeletons from four low status cemetery samples in post-Medieval London.The aim of this study was to consider the impact of poverty on the maternal/infant nexus, through an analysis of evidence of growth disruption and pathological lesions. The results highlight the dire consequences of poverty in London during this period from the very earliest moments of life.

Children of the grave: Investigating non-adult feeding practices in medieval and early modern Estonia through stable isotope analysis

“…From a socio-cultural point of view, understanding these practices helps reveal the complex interactions between childcare in different socio-economic contexts, treatment of minorities, and local traditions in dietary selection [1,2]. On the biological side, understanding these practices offers valuable insights into population demography, nutrition, and disease patterns of mothers and offspring [2][3][4]. Breastfeeding habits are deeply intertwined within the cultural framework of societies, within family traditions, and among each mother-child nexus, also constituting means for family planning and self-regulation for well-being and social status of fertile women [3][4][5][6].…”

“…On the biological side, understanding these practices offers valuable insights into population demography, nutrition, and disease patterns of mothers and offspring [2][3][4]. Breastfeeding habits are deeply intertwined within the cultural framework of societies, within family traditions, and among each mother-child nexus, also constituting means for family planning and self-regulation for well-being and social status of fertile women [3][4][5][6]. The duration of breastfeeding and the subsequent initiation of the weaning process (i.e.…”

Care of Infants in the Past: Bridging evolutionary anthropological and bioarchaeological approaches

“…Since the mid-1990s there has been a rapid increase in the amount of research on children and childhood in the past from anthropological, archaeological and bioarchaeological perspectives (Baxter, 2005 ; Crawford et al, 2018 ; Lillehammer, 2015 ; Mays et al, 2017 ), and the start of the recognition of the value of assessing the young and the intricate relationship between the mother and infant (Blake, 2017 ; Gowland & Halcrow, 2020 ; Halcrow et al, 2017 ; Le Roy & Murphy, 2020 ). The recognition of the wealth of information that can be gleaned from the study of infants and children has resulted in a large number of bioarchaeological studies investigating mortality, palaeopathology, growth and growth disruption (Lewis, 2007 , 2017 ; Halcrow & Tayles, 2008 ).…”

“…The recognition of the wealth of information that can be gleaned from the study of infants and children has resulted in a large number of bioarchaeological studies investigating mortality, palaeopathology, growth and growth disruption (Lewis, 2007 , 2017 ; Halcrow & Tayles, 2008 ). Recent advances in social bioarchaeological theory, including an integration of life-course theory and the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD) hypothesis, highlight the pivotal place of early life stages in understanding past societies, and the intricate relationship between maternal and child health (Agarwal & Glencross, 2011 ; Halcrow & Ward, 2017 ; Gowland, 2020 ; Gowland & Halcrow, 2020 ; Gowland & Knüsel, 2006 ; Sofaer, 2006 ).…”