Posted on 06/25/2010 9:54:48 AM PDT by JoeProBono
Archaeologists investigating a mass burial of 97 infants at a Roman villa in the Thames Valley believe it may have been a brothel. Tests on the site at Hambleden in Buckinghamshire suggest all died at 40 weeks gestation, very soon after birth.
Archaeologists suspect local inhabitants may have been systematically killing unwanted babies.
Archaeologist Dr Jill Eyers said: "The only explanation you keep coming back to is that it's got to be a brothel." With little or no effective contraception, unwanted pregnancies could have been common at Roman brothels, explained Dr Eyers, who works for Chiltern Archaeology.
And infanticide may not have been as shocking in Roman times as it is today. Archaeological records suggest infants were not considered to be "full" human beings until about the age of two, said Dr Eyers.....
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
liberals...
proudly killing babies since Roman times.
Fall of the Roman Empire.
lol!
bump
lol.
I think Helen Thomas was young in those days
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks GeronL. High five for the additional Roman Empire topic! If the system doesn't cease operating again tonight (my first successful trip in here today) there are a couple more on deck. |
||
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
bump
Today it could be a letter from a Chinese soldier to his wife about following the ‘one child per family policy” of the People’s Republic.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
“Even if this means a full-on civil war and 50 million dead leftist vermin.”
Have you ever considered converting to Christianity?
“Have you ever considered converting to Christianity?”
Many many times and it never happened.
That doesn't strike me as a "brothel" especially out on the fringe of the Empire in Britain. This is a ways from London or another population center, so I'm thinking a "high class" high-volume brothel isn't the explanation. Infanticide was practiced in pre-Christian Rome, but why so many on this villa? And why "under" walls and structures? I suspect a different explanation. They all appear to be newborns. Was a population being punished? Perhaps in relation to the rebellion? Was there a famine or epidemic and decision to get rid of all newborns? We don't have any data as to age. Were these burials over a period of centuries? If so, maybe the number isn't so shocking.
BTW, it looks like a charming little village.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.