Roman children

[Cave Equum]

First of all, hi! I have been checking this forum for a while now and thought it was time to post something myself.

I have recently started to do some research for a bachelorpaper on Roman children and their toys. I already have the following books:

On Roman toys;

A Willemsen, Romeins speelgoed, 2003
M. Fitta, Spiele und Spielzeug in der Antike, 1998

On Roman children:

B. Rawson, Children and childhood in Roman Italy, 2003
A. Backe-Dahmen, Die Welt der Kinder in der Antike, 2008
C. Laes and J. Strubbe, Kleine Romeinen, 2006

On childhood in general:

P. Aries, Centuries of childhood, 1965

If you happen to know any other books on these topics in Dutch, English or German, I'd really appreciate it.

[zakhx150]

Wiedemann, T. E. J, 1989, Adults and Children in the Roman empire

Tames, R., 2002, Ancient Roman children

also see Suetonius' Life of Tiberius XLIV on the Emperors use of 'minnows' - quite disturbing if true


thats all a cursory look of mine could come up with im afraid...

[Cave Equum]

Thanks, I'll check those books out.

"also see Suetonius' Life of Tiberius XLIV on the Emperors use of 'minnows' - quite disturbing if true"

According to Beryl Rawson many wealthy Roman people liked to have young, pretty children (boys as well a girls) in their company. The little slaves would serve dinner and provide entertainment. They'd be shown off, kind of like pets, to the master's guests. They are often called delicia/deliciae (delights or little darlings). It's quite likely that in some of these cases this would lead to pedophilia. Not only Tiberius was accused of this, but also, for example, Augustus and Domitian. I hadn't heard of cases where the children were as young as the so called minnows of Tiberius, which were basically infants. Keep in mind though that Suetonius' De vita caesarum is, as are most roman texts, coloured by the writer's opinion. It's undeniable though that some children were exploited in terrible ways, which is indeed quite disturbing.

[Nihonius Legio]

As much as I like the Romans in some ways, especially militarily, they are famously sickening in their behavior. Not saying all, but Greeks and Romans had little moral restraint at all.
I Roman man had every right to reject a child born from his wife. He could throw it in a garbage heap for all anyone cared, to either die or be taken in by a caring family.

[zakhx150]

Nihonius Legio\\n[quote] Roman man had every right to reject a child born from his wife.

Im assuming this refers to the power or, indeed, obligation of the Pater Familias
Personally, I'm not familiar with any examples of exposure in Roman society. Cave, do you know of any examples?

[Folkert van Wijk]

As much as I like the Romans in some ways, especially militarily, they are famously sickening in their behavior. Not saying all, but Greeks and Romans had little moral restraint at all.
I Roman man had every right to reject a child born from his wife. He could throw it in a garbage heap for all anyone cared, to either die or be taken in by a caring family.

Speaking about Barbarians... :mrgreen:

[M. Demetrius]

For us, these practices are sickening, terrible, criminal, etc. To them, they were just normal, and the way things were. It's often quite a strange thing for one culture to examine another, and do so through a predictably biased lens. I'm not advocating any of these practices, (or those of some modern cultures--which are not much better than what the Romans did--nor will I list examples of modern atrocious behavior by some groups). I'm just saying we should try to be neutral, and examine what they did in light of their worldview.

[Cave Equum]

"Personally, I'm not familiar with any examples of exposure in Roman society. Cave, do you know of any examples?"

At the moment I can't come up with a specific case, but exposure was a right of the pater familias. A reason for exposure of infants could be that the family wasn't wealthy enough to provide for the extra child. Another was the risk of dividing an inheritance into too many pieces. If, for example, the land of a farmer is divided over too many children, none of the individual pieces will be profitable.
The exposed infant could be raised by family or by a stranger. In the last case, the child would sometimes be brought up to be a slave or prostitute. There was no interest in these children, or orphans for that matter, by the state. Slowly the church would take up this role, but only partially.
Exposure was forbidden in 374 AD under emperor Theodosius. We can't be certain though how common it actually was and we must indeed, as M. Demetrius said, try to not look at it through our modern glasses, so to speak.

[Nihonius Legio]

Well of course the Romans didnt think it was terrible enough at least to stop the practice, but we today have the right to say it was terrible. Every opinion and statement made today is through the modern world view. So our opinions of ancient peoples, good or bad, is totally valid. I dont see anything wrong with judging their actions.
It is a common idea that modern people must examine history to learn from the mistakes of others. You cant recognize a mistake very well without judging the action.

[Epictetus]

There are some signs that such behaviour was discouraged. Perhaps the most famous example is in Marcus Aurelius, when he praises Antonius Pius for “putting a stop to the pursuit of boys.” (Meditations, I.16)

Doubtlessly he didn't put a complete stop to it, but the passage shows that Marcus disliked the practice and praised his predecessor for taking some sort of action to stop it.

(Some people wonder if the statement pertains to stopping himself or others, but it seems that most scholars now believe that the Greek verb means putting a stop to others.)

[Cave Equum]

Well of course the Romans didnt think it was terrible enough at least to stop the practice, but we today have the right to say it was terrible. Every opinion and statement made today is through the modern world view. So our opinions of ancient peoples, good or bad, is totally valid. I dont see anything wrong with judging their actions.
It is a common idea that modern people must examine history to learn from the mistakes of others. You cant recognize a mistake very well without judging the action.

I see your point, but what I meant was that, looking back on their practices, you can't say Romans were worse people than us. In those times there was no social security system and for a poor man it could be very hard to support his family. So when a child was born that he couldn't provide for, it might be his only option to dispose of it.
About pedophilia, it probably wasn't very common. And as said before, not all Romans condoned it. That it appears in quite a few literary sources, mostly about wealthy and powerful people, doesn't mean it was common. It might just have been an interesting topic, because it was shocking for them as well.

[Nihonius Legio]

I still wouldnt side with someone who thinks it's better to let a baby die than to at least try taking care of it. I would support them trying to give the baby to a good family, but not just throwing it away. I also understand that the Roman viewpoint was different on this issue than ours is, but I still judge that viewpoint. Other than some Roman flaws such as this, I think they are amazingly interesting. I may even try specializing in studying them in college, I'm already writing a large essay on them for one of my classes.

[Cave Equum]

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the way (some) Romans treated children. I'm just saying that those were different times. But something tells me we're not going to agree on this :wink: That's okay though.

On a different note, does any one else have any useful books, articles or quotes?

[Carlton Bach]

I still wouldnt side with someone who thinks it's better to let a baby die than to at least try taking care of it. I would support them trying to give the baby to a good family, but not just throwing it away.

Exposure did not usually entail throwing the child away, but rather seems to have functioned in a context of recognised 'pickup points' where a baby would be found and could be taken in by others as a slave, a member of the household, or an adopted child. John Boswell studied the phenomenon in his book 'The Kindness of Strangers', and comes to the conclusion that the Roman system continued to operate until the early point of the High Medieval period, when exposure dried to a trickle (probably because economic opportunity was better), and was then replaced by foundling homes.

Many scholars assume that Greek naming patterns based on 'Kopro-' designate exposed children picked up from dungheaps. The Latin term 'alumnus' seems to describe a family status that exposed children taken in by families would attain if it was not enslaved, but also not adopted.

[Tarbicus]

On Roman children:

B. Rawson, Children and childhood in Roman Italy, 2003

That's an excellent book, and put a new take on Roman attitudes to children for me.