27th June 2010, 08:35 AM
kevin wooldridge Wrote:Not so many grave sites found, but there are plenty of references in Roman literature to infanticide - so the practice in itself is not unusual. I like Troll's idea of a Roman laying-in hospital.
Although the bones were kept from the excavation , there doesn't seem to much in the way of supporting straitgraphic evidence so the context of the burials and the time period over which they were interred may be difficult to establish. I mean if the site was in use for 300+ years then the number of nenoate burials per year is extremely small and probably not statistically significant (roughly one dead child every 3 years seems to be a remarkably low infant death rate) and of course the 'sensational' aspect of the story loses some of its phlegm.....
It was the numbers involved which interested me (note my edit to remove mass grave as I got a little exceited myself!!)but if you say there is no certainty as to the period over which they have been found then yes, it is less "scandalous." My own personal experience of such things is one infant found at a 3rd C Roman level in a fort and a medieval hospital burial ground (so a bit Tom Jones there really).
Hopefully the programme will explore the lack of stratigraphic eveidence as you say. I suppose we will have to wait and see.
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!