The archaeology of childhood is an emerging field of study within archaeology that applied anthropology, ethnography, history, sociology, osteology and biological anthropology to the study of the development and lives of juvenile human individuals (children) in past societies from a material perspective.

Theoretical background

Early theories

French sociologist Robert Hertz, in his book Death and the Right Hand (1960),[1] voiced contemporary views on child burials being less elaborate in the past because children were not integrated into society yet and it was thus easier to part with them. Philippe Ariès wrote a highly influential historical study of childhood in Centuries of Childhood (1962),[2] arguing that "childhood", associated with innocence (i.e., "cherubs"[3]), was a modern convention and that pre-17th century (European) children were treated as small adults.[2]

Chart showing the evolution of six child-rearing psychogenic modes in "advanced nations" based on the black and white chart from "The Emotional Life of Nations" by Lloyd DeMause (2002), also appearing in earlier works.

The life course approach was developed within history, biology, economics, psychology and the social sciences in the 1960s in order to analyze the structural, social, cultural and health relationships between generations. Events that happen during early life were highlighted in formal theory as having significant impact on later life status.

In the 1970s and 1980s, social historical debates on adult-child relations through time, especially in early modern Europe, were three-stranded according to Mark Golden:[4]

  1. Childhood changed over time, and our modern (Western) concept of children is a modern social invention,[5][6] different to attitudes among "infanticidal/abandoning" societies in the past.[6]
  2. Attitudes towards children were steady in 16th-19th century England and United States.[7]
  3. Attitudes towards children are historically contingent and show spatial and temporal variation.[8] Historian Stephen Wilson[9] gives examples of medieval and pre-industrial families in Europe showing great grief at infant death, care for ill children, and the importance of children in religious practice despite (or even due to) high child mortality.

Those who tried to study children archaeologically did so in isolation, until the 1990s. Early researchers included British archaeologists Gawain and Norman Hammond.[10] They called on archaeologists to consider the effects of child play on the distribution of artefacts on sites, by looking at the effects of children playing on trash distribution in a modern vacant grassland in Berkeley, California. Yet, the focus was not on how to recognize children playing but to recognize that this might be a "distorting effect" on artefact distribution.

Second-wave feminist archaeology

The 1980s saw the rise of feminist archaeology. The same impulse that drove some archaeologists to find and study women in archaeological research to counter androcentrism, triggered much of the research into the archaeology of childhood. Gender where it intersected with class, sexuality, race as well as age began to be interrogated. Studied highlighted the role women played in ancient societies[11] and how sex roles began to be socialized or performed from a young age.[12] In other words, they studied "the production of adulthood".[13] Henrietta Moore demonstrated in her anthropological work Space, Text and Gender (1986)[14] how gendered space among the Marakwet of western Kenya was interpreted differently where it intersected age hierarchies. The close research link between gender and age has persisted.[15][16][17][18]

In the 1980s-1990s, the "child" in archaeology began to be studied in its own right. Grete Lillehammer, in 'A child is born: the child's world in an archaeological perspective' (1989),[19][17] put forward a methodological manifesto to recognize and study children from archaeological remains, especially human bones, stone artefacts and toys. In Gender and Archaeology: Contesting the Past (1999),[20] Roberta Gilchrist reflected on the identification of different ages, while differentiating between biological, chronological and social life stages. In 2023, April Nowell received the 2023 European Archaeological Association Book Prize for Growing up in the Ice Age: fossil and archaeological evidence of the lived lives of Plio-Pleistocene children (2021), which was described as "a socially inclusive emphasis on dynamic and diverse childhoods, in which children are seen to have been active social and economic agents" with a wider evolutionary perspective.[21]

Biological anthropology & evolutionary studies

Important works studying biological stages of human young were published from the 1990s onwards. In Evolutionary Hypotheses for Human Childhood (1997),[22] Barry Bogin argued that "childhood" was a unique social as well as physiological stage in human life when compared to other great apes and explored models and mechanisms for why childhood evolved. Humans have long infancy periods when a baby will be mostly if not completely dependent on its mother and community (cooperative breeding, alloparenting) for survival. During the subsequent childhood stage where overall growth slows, the young individual is very active and processing a lot of information.[22][23]

Current trends

For the past two decades, research has followed the trajectory set in the 1990s for more context-specific studies of children themselves,[24] including their personhood.[25] There have been comprehensive studies of the variability of childhood in past and present societies.[3][26] There has also been productive discourse on the main issues of biological and social approaches to childhood in archaeology.[27] Joanna Sofaer's seminal work The Body as Material Culture (2006)[28] reserved a chapter on Age, and in the same year Mary Lewis published The Bioarchaeology of Children.[29] A focus on child bodies corresponds to a focus on their individual stories.

Archaeological applications

Child bodies and bioarchaeology

Archaeologists have and are developing methods to estimate ages of people more accurately from their skeletons.[30][31] Some newer ageing methods include AlQahtani et al. (2010)[32] and Shapland & Lewis (2014).[33] Common methods of ageing are, in order of decreasing accuracy: tooth formation, dental eruption, fusion of the long bones, fusion of the skull epiphyses, and bone size.

The health of child bodies related to early-onset diseases or malnutrition have been studied. Anemia is one such disease which supposedly manifested as skull porosities in a high proportion of child remains in the Mediterranean and Americas.[34][35][36] The paleopathology of children has been studied by Mary Lewis, particularly evidence of work strain such as joint disease and trauma in young urban Medieval males from England (900-1550 BCE) which indicated that they may have been doing domestic service and participating in interpersonal violence.[37][38]

Life stages

Stone figurines found at the Xagħra Stone Circle, now displayed at the Ġgantija museum

It is not common for specific life stages in the past to be physically preserved. Distinguishing child depictions on figurative objects can be problematic, as smaller individuals in group compositions for example may not necessarily be children. But the Xagħra Stone Circle is one rare example of various life stages discovered together. These depictions are inanimate so we cannot associate each stage with its responsibilities and expectations. Full archaeological study can shed some light on life courses. Roberta Gilchrist took such an approach in her book Medieval Life: Archaeology and the Life Course (2012).[39]

Funerary treatment

Generally, due to delayed personhood for young children,[3] infants tend to be buried separate from adult burials or else differently to adults, and in some periods tended to be buried within buildings as opposed to cemeteries. This is context-specific and variable through time. Sometimes children would be buried with items that would compensate for their early death or act as amults for their protections such as quartz pebbles in Bronze Age child burials in Ireland.[40] In some cases, children have relatively less decorated burials; but there are exceptions.[41] Those with elaborate and furnished burials have been interpreted as inheriting prestige and rank, but this assumption should not be taken for granted. Children may be buried with tools that suggest what activities they were involved with in life, such as weaving or grinding grain.

Infanticide and child sacrifice

Infanticidal practices in the past have been the subject of much archaeological debate. Specifically, how common a practice this was and what this means for our interpretation of overall attitudes towards children in past societies. The theory that high child mortality leads to parental indifference to children has been criticized.[4] It is also clear that in societies where infanticide was practised, wanted children could be cared for greatly. For example, wanted children in Classical Greece were cared for and their deaths mourned, though infant exposure (especially of female infants) was practised.[4]

Children were sometimes sacrificed because they had qualities different to adults that gave them ritual importance. For example, children from all over the Inca Empire were selected for the capacocha (sacrificial rite marking important events). Sacrificed children, according to isotopic analyses of their hair and contents of their organs (well preserved due to the cold mountain climate) were fed typically elite diets, given coca and alcohol for many months until their sacrifice at important shrines.[42] The reasons for sacrifice, based on ethnography, seems to have been the purity of children and their mediator role between their people and the Inca deities. They may have thus been married to persons in the landscape (e.g., the mountain). The sacrifices also had political weight.[43] The Llullaillaco children were sacrificed after the Llullaillaco region had been conquered by the Incas. Another famous example of capacocha is Mummy Juanita found on Mount Ampato, Peru.

An example of a cradleboard in use

Childcare

As children are dependent on their parents and alloparents, childcare is an important aspect of their lives. Examples of childcare have been cradleboarding and intentional cranial modification. The latter is practiced by societies around the world for aesthetic or medical purposes. An infant's head is very pliable and can be shaped by tightly wrapping it in certain ways.

The rare fossilized White Sands footprints show adults, teenagers and children moving across a landscape tens of thousands of years ago. Footprints of a female adult and occasional ones of a toddler together track how the single adult was moving in the landscape with the child without a sling, alternately carrying them, shifting them from side to side, and letting them walk alongside her.[44]

Details of excavations at the White Sands National Park, and the footprints uncovered

There are some child-related assemblages that can be studied archaeologically. Objects like ceramic feeding bottles and rattles are usually associated with children but their recovery depends on preservation.

Learning

Children, whether formally taught or not, tend to imitate or practice the skills of those older than them. These include pottery-making, hunting or basket-weaving.[3][45][46] It is possible to distinguish pottery vessels and figurines made by children from those made by adults, both using technical analysis (more crudely made, smaller vessels are attributed to amateurs, who may include children) and measurements of ridge densities preserved on the surface of ceramics.[47][48] For example, fingerprints of a 13 year-old child and two adults were found on fragments of pottery from Orkney, indicating that older potters may have been teaching novices how to make vessels.[49] In Ancient Mesopotamia, high status children learned to write using student practice tablets,[50] and subsequently participated in social and political life differently.

Play and social lives

Miniature chous depicting a young boy pulling a wheeled toy and smelling a chous

In many ancient societies as in many modern societies, children spend most of their time post-infancy with individuals other than their parents, including their siblings, peers and other relatives. Play and socialization beyond the parent-child relationship are therefore important. Ancient Greek choes (small wine jugs) produced for sale at the Anthesteria festival (in which children participated) in Classical Athens depict scenes from childhood that are informative of play. It is suspected that these were produced as gifts to children.[4] Some scenes include children playing with wheeled toys and older children looking after younger children on swings. Though many children play with what they find, and such makeshift playthings rarely preserve in archaeological contexts, there are extant examples of what could be toys from the past. Although, some toys are found within burials, and burials tend to be separate cultural performance and ritual grounds than daily life, thus obscuring their meaning.

Modern debates and future directions

There is increasing attention paid to the relationships between the youngest and oldest of society. Like childhood in the past, the experience of the elderly, beyond possibly being important members of society, was understudied until recently.[51][52] For example, grandparents can play a great role as alloparents, and this close relationship can be studied archaeologically.[53]

The archaeology of childhood has been studied in the margins by a few interested researchers – predominantly those identifying as women; however it is yet to be incorporated into mainstream discourse and standard archaeological interpretation. This may be due to the relatively poor preservation of subadult remains and therefore their under-representation in archaeological assemblages, or to the marginalization of subadults by adult academics (i.e. adultcentrism).[27]

See also

References

  1. ^ Hertz, Robert (1960). Death and the Right Hand. London: Routledge.
  2. ^ a b Ariès, Philippe (1962). Centuries of Childhood. J.Cape.
  3. ^ a b c d Lancy, David (2014). The Anthropology of Childhood: Cherubs, Chattel, Changelings (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  4. ^ a b c d Golden, Mark (2015). Children and Childhood in Classical Athens (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  5. ^ Shorter, Edward (1975). The Making of the Modern Family. New York: Basic Books.
  6. ^ a b deMause, Lloyd (1974). The History of Childhood. Psychohistory Press.
  7. ^ Pollock, Linda A. (1983). Forgotten Children. Cambridge University Press.
  8. ^ Johansson, S. Ryan (1987). "Centuries of Childhood/Centuries of Parenting: Philippe Ariès and the Modernization of Privileged Infancy". Journal of Family History. 12 (4): 343–365. doi:10.1177/036319908701200119. S2CID 145641418 – via SAGE journals.
  9. ^ Wilson, Stephen (1984). "The Myth of Motherhood a Myth: The Historical View of European Child-Rearing". Social History. 9 (2): 181–198. doi:10.1080/03071028408567590.
  10. ^ Hammond, Gawain; Hammond, Norman (1981). "Child's Play: A Distorting Factor in Archaeological Distribution". American Antiquity. 46 (3): 634–636. doi:10.2307/280608. JSTOR 280608. S2CID 163236114.
  11. ^ Bertelsen, Reidar; Lillehammer, Arnvid; Næss, Jenny-Rita (1987). "Were they all men? : an examination of sex roles in prehistoric society : acts from a workshop held at Utstein Kloster, Rogaland 2.-4. november 1979". AmS-Varia 17.
  12. ^ Butler, Judith (1990). Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.
  13. ^ Joyce, Rosemary A. (2000). "Girling the Girl and Boying the Boy: The Production of Adulthood in Ancient Mesoamerica". Human Lifecycles. 31 (3): 473–483. doi:10.1080/00438240009696933. JSTOR 125113. PMID 16475297. S2CID 10658152 – via JSTOR.
  14. ^ Moore, Henrietta (1986). Space, Text and Gender. Guilford Press.
  15. ^ M., Conkey, Margaret W., 1944- Gero, Joan (2002). Engendering archaeology : women and prehistory. Blackwell. OCLC 1026130298.((cite book)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  16. ^ Louise., Stig Sørensen, Marie (2013). Gender Archaeology. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-7456-6864-2. OCLC 843202450.((cite book)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. ^ a b Lillehammer, Grete (1989). "A child is born: The child's world in an archaeological perspective". Norwegian Archaeological Review. 22 (2): 89–105. doi:10.1080/00293652.1989.9965496.
  18. ^ Baxter, Jane Eva (2005). The Archaeology of Childhood: Children, Gender and Material Culture. Rowman AltaMira.
  19. ^ Nowell, April (13 February 2023). "What was it like to grow up in the last Ice Age? | Aeon Essays". Aeon. Retrieved 2023-12-19.
  20. ^ Gilchrist, Roberta (1999). Gender and Archaeology. London: Routledge.
  21. ^ "Book Prize 2023 Winner". European Association of Archaeologists. Retrieved 19 December 2023.
  22. ^ a b Bogin, Barry (1997). "Evolutionary hypotheses for human childhood". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 104 (S25): 63–89. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(1997)25+<63::AID-AJPA3>3.0.CO;2-8. hdl:2027.42/37682.
  23. ^ Kaplan, Hillard; Hill, Kim; Lancaster, Jane; Hurtado, A. Magdalena (2000). "A theory of human life history evolution: Diet, intelligence, and longevity". Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews. 9 (4): 156–185. doi:10.1002/1520-6505(2000)9:4<156::AID-EVAN5>3.0.CO;2-7. S2CID 2363289 – via Wiley Online Library.
  24. ^ Sofaer-Derevenski, Joanna R. (2000). Children and Material Culture. London: Routledge.
  25. ^ Fowler, Chris (2004). The Archaeology of Personhood: An Anthropological Approach. Routledge.
  26. ^ Crawford, Sally; Hadley, Dawn M.; Shepherd, Gillian, eds. (2018). The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Childhood. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199670697.
  27. ^ a b Halcrow, Siân E.; Tayles, Nancy (2008). "The Bioarchaeological Investigation of Childhood and Social Age: Problems and Prospects". Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. 15 (2): 190–215. doi:10.1007/s10816-008-9052-x. ISSN 1072-5369. S2CID 53317788.
  28. ^ Sofaer, Joanna R. (2006). The body as material culture : a theoretical osteoarchaeology. Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-511-81666-6. OCLC 817930055.((cite book)): CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  29. ^ Lewis, Mary (2009). The bioarchaeology of children : perspectives from biological and forensic anthropology (Paperback re-issue ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-12187-3. OCLC 428776499.
  30. ^ Ubelaker, Douglas H. (1999). Human skeletal remains : excavation, analysis, interpretation (3rd ed.). Washington: Taraxacum. ISBN 0-9602822-7-0. OCLC 44447016.
  31. ^ Brooks, S.; Suchey, J. M. (1990-06-01). "Skeletal age determination based on the os pubis: A comparison of the Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks methods". Human Evolution. 5 (3): 227–238. doi:10.1007/BF02437238. ISSN 1824-310X. S2CID 83699716.
  32. ^ AlQahtani, S.J.; Hector, M.P.; Liversidge, H.M. (2010-03-22). "Brief communication: The London atlas of human tooth development and eruption". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 142 (3): 481–490. doi:10.1002/ajpa.21258. PMID 20310064.
  33. ^ Shapland, Fiona; Lewis, Mary E. (2014). "Brief communication: A proposed method for the assessment of pubertal stage in human skeletal remains using cervical vertebrae maturation: Estimating Pubertal Stage in Skeletal Remains". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 153 (1): 144–153. doi:10.1002/ajpa.22416. PMID 24318949.
  34. ^ Angel, J. Lawrence (1966-08-12). "Porotic Hyperostosis, Anemias, Malarias, and Marshes in the Prehistoric Eastern Mediterranean". Science. 153 (3737): 760–763. Bibcode:1966Sci...153..760A. doi:10.1126/science.153.3737.760. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 5328679. S2CID 194606.
  35. ^ Brickley, Megan B. (2018). "Cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis: A biological approach to diagnosis". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 167 (4): 896–902. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23701. PMID 30259969. S2CID 52845048.
  36. ^ Rivera, Frances; Mirazón Lahr, Marta (2017). "New evidence suggesting a dissociated etiology for cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis: RIVERA and LAHR". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 164 (1): 76–96. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23258. PMID 28594081.
  37. ^ Lewis, Mary (2016). "Work and the Adolescent in Medieval England ad 900–1550: The Osteological Evidence". Medieval Archaeology. 60 (1): 138–171. doi:10.1080/00766097.2016.1147787. ISSN 0076-6097. S2CID 163094707.
  38. ^ Lewis, Mary E. (2018-08-17), Katzenberg, M. Anne; Grauer, Anne L. (eds.), "Children in Bioarchaeology", Biological Anthropology of the Human Skeleton, Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 117–144, doi:10.1002/9781119151647.ch4, ISBN 978-1-119-15164-7, S2CID 148977813, retrieved 2023-03-03
  39. ^ Gilchrist, Roberta (2012). Medieval life : archaeology and the life course. Woodbridge. ISBN 978-1-84615-974-9. OCLC 806040071.((cite book)): CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  40. ^ Haughton, Mark (2021). "Seeing Children in Prehistory: A View from Bronze Age Ireland". Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 31 (3): 363–378. doi:10.1017/S0959774321000032. ISSN 0959-7743. S2CID 233965955.
  41. ^ Moses, S. (2004). "Çatalhöyük 2004 Archive Report". catalhoyuk.com. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  42. ^ Handwerk, Brian (2013-07-29). "Inca Child Sacrifice Victims Were Drugged". National Geographic Culture. Archived from the original on February 18, 2021. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  43. ^ Socha, Dagmara M.; Reinhard, Johan; Perea, Ruddy Chávez (2021). "Inca human sacrifices from the Ampato and Pichu Pichu volcanoes, Peru: new results from a bio-anthropological analysis". Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. 13 (6): 94. doi:10.1007/s12520-021-01332-1. ISSN 1866-9557. S2CID 234489075.
  44. ^ "Fossilized Footprints - White Sands National Park". www.nps.gov. 2022. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  45. ^ Tehrani, Jamshid J.; Riede, Felix (2008). "Towards an archaeology of pedagogy: learning, teaching and the generation of material culture traditions". World Archaeology. 40 (3): 316–331. doi:10.1080/00438240802261267. ISSN 0043-8243. S2CID 144386353.
  46. ^ Högberg, Anders (2008). "Playing with Flint: Tracing a Child's Imitation of Adult Work in a Lithic Assemblage". Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. 15 (1): 112–131. doi:10.1007/s10816-007-9050-4. ISSN 1072-5369. S2CID 162239984.
  47. ^ Kamp, Kathryn A.; Timmerman, Nichole; Lind, Gregg; Graybill, Jules; Natowsky, Ian (1999). "Discovering Childhood: Using Fingerprints to Find Children in the Archaeological Record". American Antiquity. 64 (2): 309–315. doi:10.2307/2694281. ISSN 0002-7316. JSTOR 2694281. S2CID 163265612.
  48. ^ Sanders, Akiva (2015). "Fingerprints, sex, state, and the organization of the Tell Leilan ceramic industry". Journal of Archaeological Science. 57: 223–238. Bibcode:2015JArSc..57..223S. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.001.
  49. ^ "Fingerprints point to 5,000-year-old Orkney pottery class". BBC News. 2021-10-25. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  50. ^ Shillenn, Rebecca M. (2021-10-29). "Learning to Write in Ancient Cultures". Arts & Sciences Magazine. Retrieved 2023-03-03.
  51. ^ Appleby, Jo (2018). "Ageing and the Body in Archaeology". Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 28 (1): 145–163. doi:10.1017/S0959774317000610. hdl:2381/41862. ISSN 0959-7743. S2CID 54750194.
  52. ^ Appleby, Joanna E. P. (2010-12-16). "Why We Need an Archaeology of Old Age, and a Suggested Approach". Norwegian Archaeological Review. 43 (2): 145–168. doi:10.1080/00293652.2010.531582. ISSN 0029-3652. S2CID 143693578.
  53. ^ Across the Generations the Old and the Young in Past Societies ; proceedings from the 22nd Annual Meeting of the EAA in Vilnius, Lithuania, 31st August - 4th September 2016. Grete Lillehammer, Eileen M. Murphy, Arkeologisk Museum Stavanger. Stavanger. 2018. ISBN 978-82-7760-181-6. OCLC 1088878133.((cite book)): CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
Category