Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Exposure (infant)

Infant exposure was a widespread practice in the ancient Greco-Roman world involving the abandonment of newborns in public places or remote areas, typically within the first week of life, with the frequent outcome of death due to environmental hazards, starvation, or animal predation, though some infants were rescued for enslavement or rearing by others.^[1] This method served as a form of population control, economic relief for impoverished families, and selective rejection of deformed or illegitimate offspring, reflecting paternal authority over child viability in patriarchal societies.^[2] Literary and legal texts, alongside archaeological finds such as infant cemeteries, attest to its prevalence across the Roman Empire and parts of Greece, though precise quantification remains elusive due to the indirect nature of evidence.^[1] In Sparta, newborns underwent inspection by elders to assess physical fitness; those deemed ill-born or defective were reportedly exposed on the slopes of Mount Taygetus, a practice described in ancient accounts but whose systematic enforcement and eugenic intent have been questioned by modern analyses of skeletal remains showing no disproportionate discard of impaired infants.^[3] Roman custom granted the paterfamilias absolute discretion to expose infants at sites like refuse heaps or columns adorned with flowers to signal availability for pickup, often prioritizing male heirs while exposing females or supernumerary children amid high natural infant mortality rates exceeding 200 per 1,000 births.^[2] The practice persisted into the early Christian era but faced increasing prohibition, culminating in legal bans under Emperor Valentinian I in 374 CE, which aligned with emerging Judeo-Christian valuations of infant life as intrinsic rather than conditional on utility.^[4] Key characteristics included the ambiguity between deliberate infanticide and ostensible abandonment allowing for potential survival, with exposed infants sometimes marked by tokens for possible reclamation, underscoring a cultural calculus where child rearing burdens outweighed sentimental attachments in resource-scarce contexts.^[2] Controversies in historiography revolve around overreliance on elite literary sources versus sparse empirical data, with recent scholarship tempering claims of mass-scale female or disabled infanticide in favor of economic drivers affecting all viable births.^[1]^[3]

Definition and Methods

Definition

Infant exposure, also known as child exposure or expositio, denotes the deliberate abandonment of newborns or very young infants in locations where they are left vulnerable to environmental hazards, predators, or neglect, typically resulting in death but not invariably so.^[1]^[5] This practice, prevalent in various ancient and pre-modern societies, served as an indirect method of population control or disposal of unwanted offspring, distinguishing it from direct infanticide (e.g., strangulation or drowning) by allowing for the theoretical possibility of rescue and survival, often leading to enslavement or adoption by finders.^[6]^[7] Historically, exposed infants were commonly placed at sites such as rubbish heaps, riverbanks, or wilderness areas, sometimes with identifying tokens to facilitate potential reclamation, though survival rates were low due to hypothermia, starvation, or animal attacks.^[2] The term derives from Latin expositio, implying "laying out" or "setting forth," and was not always viewed as homicide under contemporary legal or cultural frameworks, as parental authority (patria potestas in Roman law) permitted such decisions without immediate penalty.^[1]^[8] While often conflated with infanticide in modern analyses, ancient sources and practices highlight exposure's ambiguity, where death was anticipated yet not ensured, reflecting pragmatic rather than ritualistic intent.^[6]^[9]

Methods and Locations

![Jean-Pierre Saint-Ours - Judgment over the Newborns of Sparta][float-right] In ancient Sparta, newborns deemed unfit by elders were reportedly taken to the Lesche for inspection, and if rejected, exposed at the Apothetae, a chasm at the foot of Mount Taygetus, according to Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus.^[10] This method involved passive abandonment to ensure death through falls, exposure, or starvation, though modern archaeological analyses have found no direct evidence supporting systematic infanticide there, suggesting the account may reflect later traditions rather than verified practice.^[11] Across ancient Greece, exposure typically entailed leaving infants in remote or public areas such as hillsides, riversides, or wilderness spots, often swaddled and placed where they might be discovered by potential rescuers or left to perish from environmental hazards.^[2] In ancient Rome, exposed infants were commonly abandoned at urban sites including columnae lactariae (milk columns) near temples or markets, where wet nurses or slave traders could retrieve them, or at spurci lacus (filthy pools) and garbage dumps for those unlikely to be reclaimed.^[12] Families sometimes provided clothing, amulets, or tokens to facilitate later identification if reclaimed, distinguishing exposure from outright killing, though death rates remained high due to neglect or predation.^[2] Archaeological finds, such as clusters of neonatal skeletons in Roman sites like Hambleden in Britain (97 infants) and near brothels in Ashkelon, indicate disposal practices possibly linked to exposure outcomes, but these often reflect infanticide or post-abandonment burial rather than the act itself.^[2]^[13] Broader ancient practices involved placing infants at crossroads, temple steps, or natural features like riverbanks to exploit the chance of adoption while risking death by hypothermia, starvation, or animals if unclaimed.^[1] In Hellenistic contexts, such as a well in the Athenian Agora containing over 150 newborns, evidence points to disposal methods akin to exposure, potentially for illegitimate or unwanted births, though interpretations vary between ritual and pragmatic abandonment.^[14] These locations were chosen for accessibility to potential finders or isolation to prevent interference, reflecting a calculated balance between disposal and slim rescue prospects.

Rationales and Justifications

Economic and Resource Constraints

In ancient Greece and Rome, economic constraints often justified infant exposure as a pragmatic response to resource scarcity, particularly among impoverished families unable to support additional dependents in agrarian economies reliant on subsistence farming and lacking social welfare systems. The practice allowed households to allocate limited food, land, and labor to viable members, preventing the dilution of resources that could lead to collective starvation or the production of beggars and vagrants. Historical analyses indicate this was especially acute post-economic disruptions, such as the aftermath of the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE) in Greece, where widespread poverty and depression increased exposure rates as a form of delayed birth control.^[15]^[16] Philosophers provided intellectual rationales grounded in household economics. Aristotle, in Politics (c. 350 BCE), advocated exposing excess infants when parents' poverty rendered rearing impossible, positing that such measures avoided overburdening the state with unproductive paupers and maintained societal stability over sentimental attachments. Similarly, in Rome, foundational traditions attributed to Romulus (c. 753 BCE) permitted exposure only under extreme necessity, including cases where families deemed themselves too destitute to provide sustenance, as recorded by Dionysius of Halicarnassus in Roman Antiquities (c. 20 BCE), emphasizing it as a last resort to preserve paternal authority and familial viability amid fiscal pressures like taxation or poor harvests.^[17] Resource constraints disproportionately affected the free poor, including small landholders and urban laborers, where an extra mouth—often female, due to lower economic utility in patrilineal inheritance systems—could tip households into insolvency. Exposure thus functioned as an informal mechanism for family size limitation, channeling potential labor into slavery via pickup and resale, which supplemented the empire's workforce without direct state expenditure. While the precise scale remains debated due to sparse quantitative evidence, literary and legal sources consistently link it to poverty-driven decisions rather than routine malice, reflecting causal pressures in pre-industrial demographics where infant mortality from exposure complemented natural rates to align population with carrying capacity.^[1] In ancient Greek and Roman societies, the decision to expose infants fell under the authority of the male household head, reflecting patriarchal family structures where the kyrios in Greece or paterfamilias in Rome held patria potestas, granting absolute power over family members, including the right to reject or abandon newborns not deemed suitable for integration into the oikos or household.^[18]^[19] This authority enabled fathers to prioritize lineage continuity and social standing, often exposing children who could not fulfill expected roles within the family unit.^[20] A primary social consideration was the preservation of family honor, particularly through the exposure of illegitimate offspring or those born from adultery, which threatened paternal certainty and societal reputation. In Greece, Cynthia Patterson identifies illegitimacy as a leading cause, driven by familial disapproval and the child's prospective social marginalization, as such infants faced exclusion from inheritance and citizenship rights.^[6] Roman sources similarly document exposure to avert the stigma of uncertain paternity; for instance, men suspected spousal infidelity and abandoned suspected adulterine children to avoid raising non-biological heirs.^[20] Upper-class families employed exposure to shield lineage purity, as seen in Emperor Augustus's order in 8 CE to expose his grandson Agrippa Postumus, born from an illicit affair, thereby safeguarding imperial prestige.^[20] Familial dynamics further emphasized limiting heirs to prevent inheritance fragmentation and maintain economic viability within the household. Exposure allowed control over family size, favoring sons who could perpetuate the name and property holdings while minimizing divisions among siblings; daughters, often viewed as expendable due to dowry requirements, were disproportionately exposed.^[16] Ancient texts, such as those by Suetonius, record refusals to rear infants born under inauspicious omens, like the day of Germanicus's death in 19 CE, underscoring how perceived familial disfavor influenced decisions to avoid integrating "unworthy" children.^[16] These practices reinforced social hierarchies, ensuring resources concentrated on viable contributors to family and civic obligations rather than potential burdens.^[6]

Health and Genetic Factors

Ancient Greek philosophers provided explicit justifications for exposing infants with health defects or perceived genetic unfitness to preserve societal strength. Aristotle, in his Politics, advocated for a law prohibiting the rearing of deformed children, arguing that such infants represented a drain on resources and a dilution of the citizenry's quality.^[21] Similarly, Plato in The Republic recommended concealing deformed newborns in a remote place to allow their death, framing this as part of a eugenic policy to ensure only the fit contributed to the ideal state's genetic pool.^[22] These views reflected a causal understanding that physical weaknesses could propagate through families, prioritizing collective vitality over individual survival. In Sparta, Plutarch reported a custom where elders examined newborns at the Lesche; those deemed weak, sickly, or deformed were exposed on Mount Taygetus to eliminate unfit elements from the warrior class, ostensibly promoting genetic robustness.^[23] However, archaeological evidence, such as cared-for infants with congenital conditions like hydrocephaly in Athens, and textual inconsistencies— including Plutarch's 700-year temporal distance from the events—suggest this practice was not systematically enforced or culturally normative for disabilities broadly.^[3] Scholars argue that while occasional exposures for severe, non-viable deformities may have occurred, claims of routine eugenic infanticide lack direct substantiation and may stem from later idealizations of Spartan rigor.^[3] Roman paternal authority under patria potestas permitted the exposure of deformed or unhealthy infants, with Cicero endorsing the killing of such children in De Legibus to avert familial and societal burdens.^[23] Early Roman law codes allowed exposure of malformed babies of either sex, viewing them as omens of misfortune or inheritable flaws unfit for the empire's demands.^[21] This rationale extended to sickly neonates unlikely to thrive, reflecting pragmatic concerns over inheritance of frailty in a patrilineal system where healthy progeny ensured lineage continuity.^[2] Unlike philosophical ideals, Roman practice emphasized discretionary paternal judgment, though without mandates for routine genetic screening.

Historical Practices by Region

Ancient Greece

In ancient Greek societies, infant exposure entailed the abandonment of newborns, typically decided by the father shortly after birth during rituals like the amphidromia, where acceptance into the family occurred or rejection led to placement in exposed locations such as dung heaps, roadsides, or wilderness areas, often resulting in death from exposure or predation.^[2] This practice was documented in literary sources across city-states, with Plato in The Republic (c. 375 BCE) advocating exposure for deformed offspring to preserve societal health, and Aristotle in Politics (c. 350 BCE) endorsing it for infants with evident disabilities to avoid burdening the polis.^[6] However, these philosophical endorsements reflect elite male perspectives rather than universal norms, and empirical evidence for widespread implementation remains sparse. Spartan practices are frequently cited as the most institutionalized, with Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus (c. 100 CE) describing a council of elders inspecting newborns and ordering the exposure of those deemed weak or malformed at the Apothetae (a reputed rejection site near Taygetus) to enforce eugenic standards aligned with military vigor.^[24] Yet, Plutarch's account, written centuries after Sparta's classical peak (c. 500–300 BCE), lacks corroboration from contemporary sources like Herodotus or Xenophon, and no archaeological remains of mass infant deposits have been identified at alleged sites like the Kaiadas chasm, casting doubt on its scale or routine nature.^[25] Recent scholarship emphasizes that such narratives may stem from Hellenistic or Roman-era exaggerations rather than verified customs.^[3] In Athens, exposure was paternal prerogative under Solon's laws (c. 594 BCE), permitting abandonment of illegitimate, female, or economically unviable infants but prohibiting their sale into slavery, with foundlings potentially raised as slaves if recovered.^[6] Literary evidence, including Euripides' plays (e.g., Ion, c. 413 BCE), portrays exposure as a tragic but occasional recourse for poverty or shame, not systematic eugenics.^[26] Archaeological data, such as the 1931 discovery of over 400 infant remains in an Athenian well, initially interpreted as exposure victims, has been re-evaluated as likely tied to ritual sacrifices or natural deaths rather than abandonment, given the absence of trauma indicators or typical exposure sites.^[3] Broader Greek evidence challenges the prevalence of disability-based exposure: burials of infants with congenital conditions, including specialized feeding vessels and grave goods, indicate familial care extended to the impaired, contradicting accounts of routine rejection.^[27] Scholarly consensus, informed by osteological analyses from sites like the Kerameikos cemetery, posits exposure occurred sporadically for socioeconomic reasons—such as resource scarcity in agrarian households—rather than as a culturally mandated eugenic tool, with rates likely lower than in contemporaneous Rome.^[3] This view aligns with demographic models estimating Greek household sizes and fertility, where rearing multiple children was feasible absent extreme poverty.^[28]

Ancient Rome and Empire

In ancient Rome, the practice of infant exposure, termed expositio, fell under the patria potestas, granting the paterfamilias absolute authority to determine a newborn's fate, including abandonment, typically decided around the dies lustricus (eighth day for boys, ninth for girls).^[1] Unwanted infants—often those with visible deformities, illegitimate status, or born into poverty—were left in public locations such as temple columns (columna lactaria), marketplaces, or dung heaps, where death from elements, starvation, or animals was common, though some were rescued for enslavement or adoption.^[1]^[29] Literary evidence from Republican and Imperial authors illustrates casual societal tolerance; for example, Plautus and Terence's comedies reference exposure without moral outrage, while Dionysius of Halicarnassus records Romulus's legendary law permitting the disposal only of "maimed or monstrous" infants with communal oversight.^[1]^[29] Philosophers like Seneca endorsed direct euthanasia (e.g., drowning) for non-viable newborns as a rational mercy but critiqued exposure's uncertainty, and Musonius Rufus decried abandoning healthy children for economic reasons as inhuman.^[29] Exposure supplied the slave trade, with exposed infants often reared as laborers or prostitutes, and papyri from Roman Egypt (e.g., P.Oxy. 1.37–38) document parental intent to abandon for poverty.^[1] Archaeological finds, such as neonatal skeletal clusters at sites like Yewden Roman villa (with 97 infants interred under floors, dated ca. 2nd–4th centuries AD), suggest possible exposure-linked disposal, particularly near potential brothels, but analyses show no disproportionate female or deformed remains, contradicting assumptions of routine sex- or disability-based selection.^[29] Overall prevalence remains debated, with literary ubiquity indicating cultural normalcy for marginal cases, yet demographic stability in sex ratios implying it was not systematically female-preferential or demographically dominant.^[1]^[29] Under the Empire, exposure continued amid urbanization and slavery demands, aiding family size control (e.g., Cicero notes elite preferences for fewer heirs).^[1] Imperial interventions included Constantine's 313 AD rescript permitting child sales to curb lethal exposures (C.Th. V.10.1), followed by stricter bans in 374 AD under Valentinian and Valens, deeming abandonment a capital crime (C.J. VIII.51.2), signaling emerging ethical shifts influenced by Stoic, Jewish, and Christian critiques.^[1]

Other Ancient and Pre-Modern Societies

In ancient Mesopotamia, infant exposure involved abandoning newborns in public places or wilderness, often due to economic hardship or deformity, as attested in Old Babylonian model contracts that reference exposed children available for adoption or labor.^[30] Literary traditions, such as the exposure narrative in the Sargon Legend (c. 2300 BCE), parallel biblical accounts like Moses and indicate cultural familiarity with the practice as a means of child disposal without direct killing.^[31] Archaeological evidence from sites like Kish (c. 2500–2000 BCE) shows specialized infant burials, sometimes in jars, suggesting ritual responses to high infant mortality or selective abandonment, though direct causation remains interpretive.^[32] Among Germanic tribes, exposure targeted unwanted infants, particularly those deemed burdensome during migrations or resource scarcity, as noted in ethnographic accounts compiled by Roman observers like Tacitus (c. 98 CE), who described selective rearing favoring stronger offspring.^[23] In Old Norse societies of medieval Scandinavia (c. 800–1100 CE), laws such as the Norwegian Gulating and Icelandic Grágás permitted exposure of deformed newborns until the 12th century, viewing such infants as embodiments of supernatural evil (e.g., troll or changelings) that required ritual disposal in wilderness areas to avert familial misfortune.^[33] Viking Age sagas, like the 13th-century Laxdæla Saga, depict exposure as a paternal decision for economic or health reasons, with exposed children occasionally rescued and raised as thralls, though prevalence estimates vary due to limited skeletal evidence of underrepresentation in burials.^[34] In early imperial China (Han dynasty, 206 BCE–220 CE), abandonment was distinguished from outright infanticide in texts like the Shuihudi Qin bamboo slips, where parents temporarily exposed infants on the ground in rituals or permanently left them during famines, targeting daughters or illegitimate offspring to preserve family resources.^[35] By the Qing dynasty (1644–1912 CE), "baby towers" emerged as institutional sites for depositing unwanted infants, primarily girls, amid son preference and poverty, with records indicating thousands abandoned annually in regions like Guangdong.^[36] In pre-modern Japan (Edo period, 1603–1868 CE), mabiki—selective infanticide or exposure analogous to "thinning" rice seedlings—was widespread in rural areas to limit family size under domain quotas, affecting up to 20–40% of births in some villages per demographic reconstructions from temple registers.^[37] Ancient Indian Dharmashastras (c. 200 BCE–200 CE), such as the Manusmriti, reference exposure or abandonment of infants in cases of deformity, illegitimacy, or famine, framing it as a paternal duty to avoid burdening the kin group, though texts emphasize prohibitions against harming healthy male heirs.^[38] Scholarly analysis of Vedic and post-Vedic sources suggests the practice was not systematically endorsed but occurred sporadically, with archaeological infanticide evidence from sites like Harappan civilization (c. 2500 BCE) debated as accidental versus deliberate.^[39] In both Chinese and Indian contexts, female infants faced higher exposure rates due to patrilineal inheritance, contributing to documented sex ratio imbalances in historical censuses.^[40]

Literary and Mythological Depictions

Greek and Roman Literature

In Sophocles' Oedipus Rex (performed circa 429 BCE), infant exposure serves as a pivotal plot device: King Laius of Thebes, warned by an oracle that his son will kill him, orders a shepherd to expose the newborn Oedipus by piercing his ankles and abandoning him on Mount Cithaeron, yet the child survives to fulfill the prophecy unwittingly.^[41] This narrative, recounted by Jocasta, illustrates exposure as a desperate measure against divine fate, with the act's failure emphasizing human impotence.^[42] Euripides' Ion (circa 414 BCE) portrays exposure through Creusa, who abandons her infant son conceived with Apollo to conceal the god's assault and avoid dishonor; the child is rescued by a temple servant, leading to later recognition and themes of divine caprice and maternal regret. Herodotus' Histories (circa 440 BCE) includes multiple abandonment tales, such as King Astyages of Media exposing the infant Cyrus (later founder of the Persian Empire) based on a dream foretelling his overthrow, only for Cyrus to be saved by a herdsman—depicting exposure as a tool in royal intrigue and prophetic interpretation. Greek historiographical literature, such as Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus (circa 100 CE), describes Spartan custom where elders inspected newborns for viability, exposing those deemed unfit on Mount Taygetus to ensure societal strength, framing exposure as a eugenic rite tied to communal welfare rather than individual whim.^[6] Roman literature integrates exposure into foundational myths and comedic intrigue. Livy's Ab Urbe Condita (circa 27–9 BCE) recounts the twins Romulus and Remus, born to the Vestal Virgin Rhea Silvia, being ordered exposed in the Tiber River by King Amulius to eliminate rivals; rescued and nursed by a she-wolf, they embody Rome's origins in survival against abandonment.^[1] In Plautine comedy, such as Rudens (circa 211 BCE), exposure motivates recognition plots where abandoned infants, often from rape or adultery, are reclaimed years later, highlighting social mobility and familial reconciliation amid moral ambiguity. Terence's Hecyra (165 BCE) features a young woman exposing her rape-conceived child, which is later retrieved, portraying exposure as a concealed "woman's crime" that tests patriarchal authority and reveals underlying inequities in consent and lineage.^[43] These New Comedy adaptations, drawing from Greek models like Menander, treat exposure routinely as a narrative convenience for resolving illegitimacy, though scholarly analysis notes their stylized nature over literal historical endorsement.^[18]

Broader Mythological Contexts

In Mesopotamian legend, the birth story of Sargon of Akkad (c. 2334–2279 BCE), the founder of the Akkadian Empire, depicts him as the illegitimate son of a high priestess who concealed her pregnancy and, after birth, placed the infant in a reed basket sealed with bitumen, setting it adrift on the Euphrates River to avoid scandal. The basket was discovered by a drawer of water, who raised Sargon as his own; the youth later rose to conquer and rule as king, attributing his success to the goddess Ishtar. This narrative, preserved in cuneiform texts dating to the 8th–7th centuries BCE but likely drawing from earlier oral traditions, exemplifies the exposed-child motif where abandonment leads to providential rescue and heroic destiny, paralleling ruler-legitimizing tropes in ancient Near Eastern lore.^[44] Similar themes recur in Indian epic tradition, as in the Mahabharata's account of Karna (c. 400 BCE–400 CE composition), born to the unwed Kunti through invocation of the sun god Surya. Adorned with divine armor and earrings, the newborn was placed by Kunti in a floating box on the Ganges River to preserve her reputation; it drifted to be found by the charioteer Adhiratha and his wife Radha, who adopted him. Karna grew into a formidable warrior and king, his origins revealed later, underscoring motifs of hidden divinity and social ascent through survival against exposure—reflecting broader Vedic-era concerns with caste, legitimacy, and fate in Hindu mythology.^[45] The Hebrew Bible's Exodus narrative (c. 6th–5th centuries BCE redaction) features Moses, hidden by his mother from Pharaoh's decree to kill Hebrew male infants, then placed in a waterproofed reed basket on the Nile; retrieved by Pharaoh's daughter, he was raised in the royal court before leading the Israelites. This exposure-for-survival motif, akin to Sargon's, has been analyzed as part of an ancient Near Eastern pattern of heroic abandonment, where peril at birth signals divine election rather than rejection, though biblical scholars note its adaptation to emphasize covenantal themes over pagan kingship.^[46] These examples illustrate a cross-cultural archetype in Eurasian mythologies, predating and extending beyond Greco-Roman tales, often serving to validate rulers' or heroes' authority through narratives of vulnerability transformed into triumph, potentially rooted in real practices of abandonment but mythologized to convey theological or propagandistic messages. Scholarly comparisons highlight the motif's diffusion via trade and conquest, from Sumerian influences on biblical texts to epic parallels in Indo-Aryan traditions, without implying direct borrowing in all cases.^[46]

Opposition and Decline

Philosophical and Religious Critiques

In ancient Rome, Stoic philosophers provided notable critiques of infant exposure, viewing it as a violation of natural law and parental responsibility. Musonius Rufus (c. 30–c. 100 CE), a prominent Stoic teacher, condemned the practice of exposing children, arguing that parents who abandon their offspring for economic or convenience reasons betray the rational order of nature and human kinship, equating such acts to ingratitude toward divine providence.^[22] ^[1] This stance contrasted with prevailing Roman acceptance of exposure for deformed or illegitimate infants, though even critics like Rufus allowed rare exceptions for severe congenital defects, prioritizing virtue over sentimentality.^[1] Religious opposition emerged strongly from Jewish and early Christian traditions, rooted in scriptural prohibitions against murder and the sanctity of life from conception. Jewish law, as articulated in the Torah (e.g., Exodus 20:13), explicitly forbade infanticide, interpreting exposure as equivalent to homicide and rejecting pagan rationales for discarding unwanted children; rabbinic texts reinforced this by mandating care for all offspring regardless of viability.^[47] ^[48] Early Christians amplified these views, with apologists like Tertullian (c. 155–240 CE) denouncing exposure as "murder by exposure" in works such as Apologeticus, asserting that it defiled the soul and contradicted God's command to preserve innocent life.^[49] ^[50] Church fathers such as Lactantius (c. 250–c. 325 CE) further critiqued the practice as barbaric and antithetical to Christian ethics, linking it to broader pagan immorality and urging believers to rescue exposed infants as acts of mercy, which aligned with Jesus' teachings on protecting the vulnerable (Matthew 18:10).^[51] This theological framework portrayed exposure not merely as neglect but as a causal rejection of divine image-bearing in humans, fostering communal adoption practices among Christians that challenged Roman norms.^[22] Such critiques gained traction amid empirical observations of high infant mortality, emphasizing causal responsibility over cultural expediency.^[1]

Christian Influence and Legal Shifts

Early Christian doctrine explicitly condemned the exposure of infants as a form of murder, viewing it as incompatible with the sanctity of life from conception onward. Tertullian, writing around 200 AD, criticized Roman practices by noting that exposed infants were subjected to "cold and hunger, and to wild beasts and the dogs of the streets," equating such acts to infanticide.^[2] Lactantius, in his Divine Institutes circa 304–313 AD, similarly denounced the abandonment of children as a barbaric custom, arguing it violated natural law and divine order.^[52] These positions reflected a broader patristic consensus that infants possessed inherent human dignity, prompting Christian communities to rescue exposed children from dumpsites and raise them, often through informal adoption networks, which contrasted sharply with prevailing pagan norms.^[51] This theological opposition gained legal traction following the Christianization of the Roman Empire. Emperor Constantine, after his conversion in 312 AD, issued edicts criminalizing infanticide, including exposure; a key law from circa 315–318 AD stipulated that mothers who killed their newborns would be treated as murderesses and drowned, while fathers faced similar penalties for ordering exposure.^[53] The Codex Theodosianus (11.27.2) preserved Constantine's prohibition specifically against infanticide in Italy, extending accountability to those who concealed or facilitated such acts.^[54] Subsequent emperors reinforced these measures: Valentinian I and Valens in 374 AD formally outlawed the practice empire-wide, imposing capital punishment and emphasizing protection for deformed or unwanted infants previously deemed expendable.^[4] By the late fourth century, under Theodosius I's reign (379–395 AD), Christianity's state endorsement accelerated the shift, with exposure increasingly prosecuted as homicide rather than a paternal right (patria potestas). These laws marked a causal break from classical Roman tolerance of exposure, documented in sources like the Digest of Justinian, where it had been tacitly permitted for economic or eugenic reasons. In post-Roman Europe, as Germanic kingdoms adopted Christianity, similar prohibitions entered legal codes—such as the Lex Salica under Clovis I (circa 507 AD)—effectively marginalizing the practice through church enforcement and foundling systems, though isolated survivals persisted in rural areas until the early medieval period.^[55] The cumulative effect was a precipitous decline, attributable to Christianity's reframing of infant life as inviolable, supplanting utilitarian pagan rationales.^[22]

Transition to Alternative Practices

As Christian doctrine increasingly permeated Roman society from the 3rd century onward, overt infant exposure faced mounting opposition, prompting a shift toward abandonment at ecclesiastical sites where clergy and communities provided rudimentary care or adoption. Early church leaders, including Tertullian and Lactantius, explicitly condemned exposure as murder equivalent to infanticide, while Christians organized rescues of abandoned infants from dumpsites and roadsides, fostering them within families or deaconess networks.^[22] ^[2] By the 4th century, imperial legislation under Constantine I, including edicts around 315–331 CE prohibiting parental killing of children and mandating rearing of legitimate offspring, reinforced this transition, though enforcement remained inconsistent and alternative covert methods like neglect or smothering emerged to circumvent bans.^[4] In late antiquity and the early medieval period, parents redirected unwanted infants to monasteries, churches, or charitable confraternities, where oblation—dedicating children to religious life—served as a sanctioned alternative, often motivated by poverty or illegitimacy rather than direct exposure. This practice, documented in canon law from the 6th century Carolingian era, allowed families to offload economic burdens while aligning with Christian prohibitions on killing, though survival rates were low due to inadequate nutrition and disease in communal settings.^[56] Archaeological evidence from sites like Byzantine monasteries indicates clusters of infant burials, suggesting high mortality but also institutional involvement in rearing attempts.^[57] The High Middle Ages saw the institutionalization of care through foundling homes, originating in 13th–14th century Italy as civic and religious initiatives to replace ad hoc abandonment. The Ospedale degli Innocenti in Florence, established in 1419 by the Arte della Seta silk guild, introduced the ruota degli esposti—a revolving wooden cylinder for anonymous infant deposit—facilitating safe transfer from exposure sites to supervised wet-nursing and apprenticeship systems, though mortality exceeded 80% in early operations due to overcrowding and infection.^[58] ^[59] These models proliferated: France adopted similar hospices des enfants trouvés by the 17th century, while German and Austrian equivalents followed in the 18th, reflecting a broader causal shift from pagan tolerance of exposure to Christian-influenced welfare structures amid persistent demographic pressures like famine and urbanization.^[59] Despite these alternatives, scholarly analyses note that foundling systems often masked underlying infanticide rates, with abandonment rates in 18th-century Europe reaching thousands annually in major cities, underscoring incomplete eradication of child disposal practices.^[60]^[61]

Evidence and Scholarly Debates

Archaeological Findings

In Roman Palestine, excavations at Ashkelon uncovered approximately 100 neonatal skeletons in a sewer deposit beneath a bathhouse, dated to the late fourth century CE. The infants were full-term, showed no evidence of disease or skeletal malformation, and lacked trauma except possible perimortem asphyxiation, leading archaeologists to interpret the assemblage as victims of systematic infanticide, potentially offspring of prostitutes working at the adjacent facility, consistent with exposure practices for illegitimate births.^[62]^[63] At Yewden Roman Villa in Hambleden, England, digs between 1912 and 1921 revealed 97 perinatal infant skeletons in shallow boundary ditches and pits on the villa grounds, spanning the second to fourth centuries CE, alongside fewer subadult and adult remains. Osteological examination confirmed deaths occurred around or shortly after birth, with the clustered, non-cemetery deposition exceeding typical infant mortality rates and suggesting deliberate disposal rather than formal burial; initial hypotheses of a brothel-linked infanticide were complicated by ancient DNA analysis showing equal male-female ratios, undermining claims of sex-selective exposure but affirming an unnatural concentration indicative of cultural practices like abandonment of unwanted neonates, possibly slaves or those deemed economically burdensome.^[13]^[64] Comparable deposits appear at other Roman sites, including infant remains in drains and rubbish heaps in Britain and Gaul, often lacking grave goods or enclosures typical of child interments. In Classical Athens, a well in the Agora yielded over 150 neonatal skeletons mingled with dog remains, dated to the fifth-fourth centuries BCE; gestational analysis indicated full-term births without prevalent pathologies, prompting debate over whether the deposition reflects ritual sacrifice, sanctuary-related disposal, or abandonment of exposed infants from urban poverty or illegitimacy, though natural mortality clusters alone fail to account for the volume and context.^[65]^[3] These findings, while corroborating literary accounts of exposure through anomalous neonatal dumpsites, pose interpretive challenges: high baseline infant mortality (estimated 25-30% in antiquity) could inflate deposits via pragmatic refuse practices for the under-valued young, yet the perinatal focus, marginal locations, and absence of mixed-age assemblages argue against purely natural explanations, favoring causal links to selective abandonment. Scholarly consensus holds that direct attribution to exposure requires integrating bioarchaeological data with site-specific economics and demographics, as taphonomic biases and poor preservation of fragile neonatal bones further obscure prevalence.^[66]^[65]

Estimates of Prevalence and Impact

Precise quantification of infant exposure's prevalence in ancient Greco-Roman societies remains elusive due to the absence of systematic records and reliance on fragmentary literary, legal, and epigraphic evidence, which often reflects elite perspectives rather than comprehensive demographics. Scholarly analyses, incorporating demographic modeling, conclude that rates were likely limited to a few percent of annual births at most, as higher figures—such as 10-20%—would have induced negative population growth incompatible with observed stability or low positive increase (under 1 per 1,000 annually) in Greek and Roman populations, given birth and death rates around 40 per 1,000 and life expectancies of approximately 25 years.^[67]^[68] Exposure targeted specific categories, including deformed infants, illegitimate offspring, and excess daughters in resource-constrained households, with literary sources indicating higher incidence among girls than boys, though archaeological finds of infant remains in urban dumps or "baby cemeteries" are sparse and do not support mass-scale practice.^[1]^[17] The practice's demographic impact appears selective rather than transformative, contributing to marginally skewed adult sex ratios favoring males (potentially exacerbating shortages of women in some regions) without derailing overall population equilibrium, as evidenced by stable census figures and tombstone data showing balanced infant burials when adjusted for underrepresentation biases.^[67] It facilitated family size control amid high natural infant mortality (estimated 200-300 per 1,000 live births from disease and exposure risks), enabling prioritization of viable heirs and reducing economic burdens, while exposed infants who survived—through rescue by slaves, wet nurses, or foundling systems—augmented servile labor pools, indirectly supporting imperial economies via increased slavery.^[1] Debates persist, with some historians like W.V. Harris arguing limited evidence for widespread exposure before the late Republic, countering narratives of routine infanticide derived from anecdotal texts, while others note regional variations, such as higher urban abandonment rates.^[69] Overall, exposure reinforced patrilineal inheritance and eugenic selection but did not constitute a primary driver of low fertility, which scholars attribute more to contraception, abortion, and delayed marriage.^[67]

Modern Interpretations and Analogies

In contemporary bioethics, infant exposure is frequently analogized to selective abortion and postnatal infanticide, particularly in debates over the moral status of newborns with disabilities. Philosophers such as Peter Singer have argued that killing severely disabled infants shortly after birth is ethically permissible if their lives lack prospects for a worthwhile existence, drawing parallels to ancient practices where deformed or unwanted newborns were exposed to ensure societal or familial viability.^[70] Singer's position, outlined in works like Practical Ethics (1979, revised editions), posits that personhood emerges gradually post-birth, justifying interventions akin to exposure for infants deemed non-persons due to cognitive impairments, a view he extends from abortion ethics.^[71] This interpretation revives ancient rationales—such as resource scarcity or eugenic selection—but frames them in utilitarian terms, prioritizing potential suffering avoidance over intrinsic human value. Critics, including disability rights advocates, contend that such analogies overlook empirical evidence of fulfilling lives among those with severe impairments, citing studies showing high quality-of-life reports from individuals with conditions like spina bifida or Down syndrome, which were common grounds for ancient exposure.^[72] For instance, modern data from the CDC indicate that 99% of Down syndrome diagnoses lead to abortion in some regions like Iceland, mirroring ancient sex- or deformity-based exposures but via prenatal termination rather than postnatal abandonment.^[73] Pro-life scholars argue this constitutes a functional equivalent, as both practices eliminate unwanted offspring based on perceived burdens, with ancient exposure rates estimated at 20-30% in urban Roman settings per demographic analyses.^[74] Further analogies appear in discussions of "after-birth abortion," as proposed by ethicists Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva in 2013, who extend abortion justifications—such as fetal non-sentience—to newborns, equating infanticide with exposure as a means to address unwanted pregnancies discovered post-delivery. This view, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, posits no moral difference between late-term abortion and neonaticide if the infant lacks developed interests, echoing Greco-Roman legal allowances for paternal exposure within days of birth.^[75] However, empirical counterarguments highlight neurological data showing newborn pain perception and bonding capacities, challenging claims of equivalence to fetal states.^[76] These interpretations underscore ongoing tensions between ancient pragmatic infanticide and modern rights-based frameworks, with Christian historical opposition—rooted in texts like Didache 2.2 condemning exposure—informing contemporary prohibitions under laws like the U.S. Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002.^[22]^[77]

References

[1]
Child-Exposure in the Roman Empire* | The Journal of Roman Studies
Sep 24, 2012 · The exposure of infants, very often but by no means always resulting in death, was widespread in many parts of the Roman Empire.
[2]
Exposure and Infanticide in Ancient Rome
There is ample evidence from literature, legal comment and, letters of the ancient Greek practice of 'exposing' unwanted newborn infants.
[3]
Ancient Greeks didn't kill 'weak' babies, new study argues | Science
Dec 10, 2021 · In 1931, for example, excavators uncovered the remains of more than 400 infants in a well in Athens. In a 2018 analysis, archaeologists showed ...
[4]
From Right to Sin: Laws on Infanticide in Antiquity - PubMed
In East Asia, selective female infanticide was common. In Greece and Rome, children's lives had little value. Infanticide was outlawed in 374 CE.Missing: exposure scholarly
[5]
Roman Family and the Exposure of Infants - ThoughtCo
Feb 2, 2019 · The practice of abandoning their infants. This is generally known as exposure because the infants were exposed to the elements. Not all infants so exposed died.
[6]
The Causes of Infant Exposure in Ancient Greece - jstor
Clearly in infanticide the death of the infant is the necessary result; in exposure it is only an expected or possible result, an ambiguity which serves well.Missing: scholarly | Show results with:scholarly
[7]
Infanticide | Oxford Classical Dictionary
Dec 22, 2015 · Infanticide, killing of infants a method of family limitation. The term as generally used by historians also covers exposure of infants, ...
[8]
Εκθεσις and Αποθεσις : the Terminology of Infant Exposure in Greek ...
Unlike the compounds with άπο-, έκτίθημι and words of the same family never refer to the exposure of a baby in a lonely place where death is inevitable.
[9]
Infant Exposure and Infanticide - Oxford Academic
This chapter discusses the ancient practice of infant exposure via the abandonment of a newborn within the first week of life.Missing: scholarly | Show results with:scholarly
[10]
THE SPARTAN PRACTICE OF SELECTIVE INFANTICIDE AND ITS ...
reliability. It is clear from the way Plutarch introduces the quoted passage that the reason why he found the infanticidal practice worth mentioning was.
[11]
Infanticide - Sparta Reconsidered
The documentary evidence is that infanticide in the form of abortions and exposure of unwanted infants after birth were the only effective contraceptive known ...
[12]
Roman women and children Part 3 - Newborns | The Vindolanda Trust
May 1, 2021 · In ancient Rome, the birth of a child was a solemn event for the household. The corona natalitia (chaplet) was suspended over the door of the vestibule.<|control11|><|separator|>
[13]
Ancient DNA study of the remains of putative infanticide victims from ...
As noted above, infanticide was identified at the Roman Ashkelon brothel site where remains of nearly 100 perinatal infants were found (Smith and Kahila, 1992).
[14]
Archeological Evidence for Newborn Disposal in Hel lenistic Greece ...
Jun 10, 2020 · This chapter uses analysis of bones and artifacts recovered from a single, abandoned well in the Athenian Agora to examine the disposal of infants who died in ...<|separator|>
[15]
PLATO AND ARISTOTLE ON THE EXPOSURE OF INFANTS ... - jstor
B.C. the exposure of infants became increasingly frequent throughout the Greek world, and that in the course of time it was freely and arbitrarily practised ...
[16]
[PDF] Did Ancient Romans Love Their Children? Infanticide in Ancient ...
Infanticide, or exposure, was practiced in ancient Rome, where parents would expose children to the world, hoping for rescue, but sometimes with the intent for ...
[17]
(PDF) Child-exposure in the Roman Empire - Academia.edu
The exposure of infants,' very often but by no means always resulting in death, was widespread in many parts of the Roman Empire.
[18]
The Exposure of Infants in Roman Law and Practice - jstor
extent of the Roman patria potestas we cannot deny that it almost inevitably implies an option not to constitute the relation of father and child, if the ...
[19]
https://brill.com/downloadpdf/book/edcoll/9789047402756/B9789047402756_s006.pdf
[20]
Family Planning in Greco-Roman Antiquity
Jun 30, 2022 · Infant exposure also occurred among the upper classes, either to protect the family's honour from illegitimate pregnancy or to prevent an ...
[21]
Essay: Abortion and infanticide in the ancient world - John Wyatt
Feb 6, 2019 · ... deformed child', or an excess number of existing children ... Aristotle supported a law to ensure the compulsory exposure of all malformed babies ...
[22]
What we can learn from Christianity's resistance to infanticide and ...
Mar 13, 2019 · While abortion is considered to be the deliberate termination of a foetus during the pregnancy, infanticide and exposure are methods of dealing ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[23]
Infanticide In The Ancient World - EARLY CHURCH HISTORY
Roman law, religion and the entire ethos saw nothing morally wrong with infanticide or with abandoning their newborns on dung heaps or city garbage dumps.
[24]
[PDF] The Significance of Children in Ancient Greece: An Archaeological ...
Evidence such as the high mortality rates, low emotional attachment, low-effort child burials, and the practice of exposure are all used to support the ...
[25]
Did the Spartans throw babies down mountains? - Bad Ancient
Aug 31, 2020 · The Spartans used to dispose of “imperfect” or weak babies by throwing them off of Mount Taygetus into a pit.
[26]
Infant Exposure in Ancient Greece: A Form of Infanticide | Cairn.info
Rather than the term “infanticide,” it is more appropriate in the case of Ancient Greece to use the term “infant exposure.”Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[27]
Did the Ancient Greeks Practice Infanticide? - Archaeology Magazine
Dec 13, 2021 · ” Archaeological evidence for infant care in Greece also includes small ceramic bottles with spouts found in some infant graves. The ...
[28]
Perspectives on Female Infanticide in Classical Greece - jstor
No doubt some Greeks practiced exposure or infanticide under certain extreme circumstances: illegitimacy, deformity, and poverty, it happens today. But there is ...
[29]
Four Representative Examples of Roman Attitudes Toward Infanticide
Dec 15, 2023 · Contrary to many claims, the archaeology actually does not support there having been any preferential infanticide of girls and the disabled.
[30]
Two Old Babylonian Model Contracts
All these expressions clearly prove that the practice of exposure was quite widespread in ancient Mesopotamian society, and that children were abandoned in ...
[31]
[PDF] Infant Loss in Ancient Mesopotamia
Jun 23, 2014 · The most famous example of infant exposure in the ancient Near East and an ana- logue to the Sargon story is that of Moses, who is exposed ...
[32]
An Exploration of Infant Burial Practices at the Site of Kish, Iraq
Oct 30, 2022 · Specialized infant burial practices and precincts are not unique to Kish, having been documented at other Near Eastern sites. In the case of ...
[33]
(PDF) The Place of the Evil: Infant Abandonment in Old Norse Society
Early medieval laws in Norway and Iceland allowed exposing infants with severe deformities until the twelfth century. Deformities correlated with supernatural ...
[34]
Selective female infanticide as partial explanation for the dearth of ...
Aug 21, 2011 · This thirteenth-century Icelandic saga gives an example of 'exposure', or the abandonment of an unwanted child.
[35]
Infant Abandonment in Early China
Mar 26, 2015 · CrossRefGoogle Scholar The second is the Han custom whereby infants were ritually exposed by being placed temporarily on the ground on the third ...
[36]
Baby Towers and the Politics of Infant Burial in Qing China
Due to their association with infants, baby towers became intimately connected to other issues such as childbirth, infanticide, and the perceived mistreatment ...
[37]
[PDF] Infanticide and Population Growth in Eastern Japan, 1660–1950
The most famous of these, mabiki or “thinning,” likened infants to rice plants, some of which needed to be uprooted as seedlings to give their siblings the ...<|separator|>
[38]
Abandonment and exposure in Hindu Religion - GKToday
The Dharmashastras (law books) of ancient India contain scattered references to abandonment and exposure, primarily in relation to children, slaves, dependents, ...
[39]
[PDF] Child Abandonment and Homes for Unwed Mothers in Ancient India
of female infants, that "in ancient India foeticide, infanticide and exposure of newborn boys were prohibited, and certainly unknown,". Comparison with the ...
[40]
INFANT ABANDONMENT IN EARLY CHINA - jstor
rate of infant mortality affected practices such as abandonment and infanticide in early China. While the average life expectancy in Han China cannot have ...
[41]
An Inverted Nemesis. On Sophocles, Oedipus Rex, 1270 - jstor
ON SOPHOCLES, Oedipus Rex, 1270. AT verse 718 of the Oedipus Rex, Jocasta tells how Laius exposed his infant child : ... depict the process to the audience-~ ...
[42]
Oedipus the King - Duke People
... exposure of the infant Oedipus and to his horrible blinding. Note further the repeated insistence on the need to "pin down" the murderer, that is, to solve ...
[43]
The Exposure of Infants in Ancient Rome - jstor
Anthropologists have collected a considerable body of material which shows that infanticide is a common phenomenon of pri- mitive community life. (See Frazer, ...
[44]
Sargon vs Moses - Tekton Apologetics
Our primary source here and hereafter is Brian Lewis' The Sargon Legend (American Schools of Oriental Research, 1978). Sargon, strong king, king of Agade, am I.
[45]
Section CCCVII - The Story of Karna: Birth, Adoption, and Training
Apr 28, 2024 · A Suta named Adhiratha and his wife Radha found a box drifting in the river Ganga, which contained a baby boy with celestial features. They ...
[46]
Moses, Sargon, and the Exposed Child Motif in Ancient Literature
By “exposed child” he means stories that have the elments of the Moses birth in them. Redford's goal isn't specifically to deal with the Moses story, but that's ...Missing: Akkad | Show results with:Akkad
[47]
The Rights of Children: Infanticide Vs Jewish Tradition - The Blogs
Apr 10, 2024 · Legal Prohibitions: Jewish law explicitly prohibits infanticide and condemns any form of child sacrifice or killing of infants. Such acts are ...
[48]
[PDF] INFANTICIDE AND THE APOSTOLIC DECREE OF ACTS 15 david ...
Normally Romans used the adjective “exposed.” Jewish and early Christian authors were outspoken critics of abortion and infanticide, and these practices were ...
[49]
What We Can Learn From Christian Responses To Infanticide
Jun 21, 2019 · First, the early church openly condemned the practices of infanticide and exposure ... early Christians acted to protect exposed infants. This was ...Missing: critiques fathers
[50]
It is NOT New! How the Early Church Dealt with Abortion and ...
Early Christian writers spoke both about abortion and the common practice at that time of “abandoning” or “exposing” unwanted infants at birth.
[51]
The Christian Compassion Revolution - BibleMesh
Jun 1, 2022 · Early Christians were unanimous in their condemnation of infanticide and child abandonment. In this, they were radically counter-cultural.
[52]
CHURCH FATHERS: Divine Institutes, Book V (Lactantius)
For as an infant is unable, on account of the tenderness of its stomach, to receive the nourishment of solid and strong food, but is supported by liquid and ...
[53]
Infanticide in ancient Rome - IMPERIUM ROMANUM
Sep 26, 2019 · A breakthrough in criminalizing infanticide was the legislation of Emperor Constantine (306–337), which provided that the mother who killed her ...
[54]
Did Valentinian and Valens ban infanticide mostly due to concern for ...
Jun 25, 2022 · Now we recall how Constantine outlawed infanticide in Italy (Codex Theodosiani 11.27.2) and basically told folks if you can't take care of ...What do you know about the Roman law that demanded that you kill ...Was Infanticide legal in Rome? : r/AskHistorians - RedditMore results from www.reddit.com
[55]
Exposed Child: Transplanting Roman Law into Late Antique Jewish ...
Child exposure occurred in the late antique Roman Empire, in polytheist, Christian, and Jewish communities, as a result of economic and familial situations.9 ...
[56]
[PDF] abandonment and infanticide. Throughout his-
Studies of Western Europe from the Middle Ages to the. 19th century reveal a substantial history of infanticide and of abandonment to foundling homes, ...
[57]
[PDF] At the Brink of Being: Infant Death and Burial in Roman Britain
Introduction. The burial treatment of infants in Roman Britain has received considerable attention from archaeologists over the last two decades2.
[58]
Foundling Homes - Renaissance and Reformation
Jun 26, 2012 · Institutional foundling homes first emerged in late-14th-century Italy as distinct charitable initiatives of civic governments, confraternities, and guilds.Missing: rise | Show results with:rise
[59]
Exposed and Abandoned. Origins of the Foundling Hospital - PubMed
Dec 13, 2022 · Abandoning undesired newborn infants was a Roman form of family limitation. They were exposed or given to foster mothers. Christianization alleviated their lot.Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
[60]
Full article: 'Missing girls' in historical Europe: reopening the debate
Nov 5, 2022 · Recent research argues that discriminatory practices unduly inflated female excess mortality during infancy and childhood in historical Europe.Missing: ancient | Show results with:ancient
[61]
Infanticide - Renaissance and Reformation - Oxford Bibliographies
Oct 24, 2024 · Infanticide, from the low Latin infanticidium, refers to the murder of a newborn, a crime found in all societies, in every historical period, and in most cases ...
[62]
Identification of infanticide in archaeological sites: A case study from ...
Skeletal remains of nearly 100 infants found in a Late Roman-Early ... Eroticism and Infanticide at Ashkelon. Biblical Archaeological Review, 17 ...
[63]
Ashkelon's Dead Babies - Archaeology Magazine Archive
The number of infants, all of the same age and with no signs of disease or skeletal malformation, suggested infanticide rather than a catastrophe such as ...
[64]
Perinatal infant death at the Roman villa site at Hambleden ...
The observation that the infants from this site were not accorded normative burial treatment, but rather were cast into a sewer that ran beneath a brothel, ...
[65]
Archaeological Evidence for Infanticide in Roman Britain Fact or ...
Analysis of sites such as Yewden villa revealed 97 infant burials predominantly neonates, indicating presumed infanticide. Furthermore, age distributions ...
[66]
A case study from the Late Roman-Early Byzantine periods at ...
Aug 10, 2025 · Archaeological evidence for infanticide was obtained in Ashkelon, where skeletal remains of some 100 neonates were discovered in a sewer ...
[67]
[PDF] The Problem of Female Infanticide in the Greco-Roman World - Gwern
the exposure of children (and any resultant infanticide) have established that the practice was of negligible importance in Greek and Roman society.
[68]
The Problem of Female Infanticide in the Greco-Roman World
the exposure of children (and any resultant infanticide) have established that the practice was of negligible importance in Greek and Roman society.
[69]
Evidence Does Not Support 'Common' Infanticide in Ancient Rome
May 25, 2016 · Harris says there is little evidence to support a widespread practice of infant exposure in the Roman world up to the late Republican Period.
[70]
Death with a Happy Face: Peter Singer's Bold Defense of Infanticide
Apr 16, 2009 · Singer hedges with a pronouncement that we should restrict infanticide to severely disabled infants, but as Peter Berkowitz explains, the ...Missing: exposure | Show results with:exposure
[71]
Peter Singer, Discussing infanticide - PhilPapers
Jeremy Bentham, protesting against the cruelty of inflicting the death penalty on mothers who kill their newborn infants, described infanticide as the killing ...Missing: exposure | Show results with:exposure
[72]
What I learned about disability and infanticide from Peter Singer
Jan 10, 2018 · Singer has not focused on infanticide for decades, but his ideas still ache in the disability world, like a wound that won't heal. Singer is ...Missing: exposure | Show results with:exposure
[73]
Infanticide: Comparing Ancient Greco-Roman Practices with Modern ...
Mar 8, 2008 · Infanticide was not viewed in the same moral light by Greeks and Romans as it was by Jews and Christians. The modern debate on abortion has ...
[74]
What's the Difference Between Abortion and Infanticide?
Feb 5, 2019 · Pro-life philosophers agree, of course, but insist that both abortion and infanticide are equally instances of the unjust taking of human life, ...<|separator|>
[75]
Infanticide: a reply to Giubilini and Minerva | Journal of Medical Ethics
Alberto Giubilini and Francesco Minerva's recent infanticide proposal is predicated on their personism and actualism. According to these related ideas, human ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[76]
[PDF] Infanticide - Philosophy, Rutgers
It informs most legal codes, which tend to permit early. Page 7. Infanticide. 7 abortions but to restrict or prohibit late ones. And it is a presupposition of ...
[77]
H. Rept. 107-186 - BORN-ALIVE INFANTS PROTECTION ACT OF ...
... Infanticide and the Legal Status of Abortion Survivors On June 28, 2000, in ... Princeton University Bioethicist Peter Singer Advocates Legal Killing of Disabled ...