Comment on ‘A Bayesian approach to ageing perinatal skeletal material from archaeological sites: implications for the evidence for infanticide in Roman Britain’ by R.L. Gowland and A.T. Chamberlain

Abstract

In 1993, I published a paper noting that the age distribution of perinatal infants for some Romano-British sites did not conform to a natural mortality pattern but rather showed a pronounced peak at a gestational age corresponding approximately to a full term infant. I interpreted this as suggestive of infanticide, given that the deed is generally carried out immediately after birth. Gowland and Chamberlain have recently published in this journal (J. Archaeol. Sci. 29 (2002) 677) a reconsideration of the problem of Roman infanticide in which they suggest that the peak I observed in the Romano-British perinatal age at death distribution may have been an artefact of the particular ageing technique I used, and they hence call into question the evidence for Roman infanticide. In this comment I argue that their work is seriously flawed and, using a re-analysis of my 1993 data, I demonstrate that the perinatal peak I observed in the Romano-British age distribution is a robust result that supports an interpretation of infanticide.