Interdisciplinarity, Archaeology and the Study of Medieval Childhood

Abstract

Children's lives are important, both in their own right because childhood is a universally experienced stage of life, and because the perception and treatment of children both reflects and impacts on society more widely. However, children's lives are elusive to the archaeologist, as children leave less physical trace than adults in the material record (e.g. Lillehammer 1989; Chamberlain 1997, 249). In order to find archaeological evidence for childhood we need to know what it looks like; but in order to know what it looks like, we need to find it: the ultimate taphonomic conundrum. In attempting to resolve this, it is clear that we should consider the contribution other sources of evidence can make. This chapter explores analyses pertaining to medieval children carried out within four non-archaeological disciplines − History; Art History; Literature; and Folklore Studies − in the hope that it may inspire and encourage greater interdisciplinary familiarity and exploration. Considering approaches from these disciplines is not intended to suggest that there are (or should be) rigid distinctions separating material of interest to different disciplines: this is simply not the case − an illustrated parchment account of a medieval saint's life, for example, is simultaneously text, art and artefact. But different disciplines do use different techniques and approaches, and so the aim in this chapter is to look at the potential that different analytical approaches have to illuminate and expand our knowledge and understanding of medieval children and childhood, and how this can complement archaeological approaches. We will also see that the prevailing theoretical framework within which research is conducted is crucial to the capacity of scholars, in any discipline, to engage with the evidence for childhood. These disciplines inevitably touch on material from other disciplines such as Philosophy, Theology and Historical Geography which will not be discussed separately for reasons of space. These are of course not the only disciplines from which archaeologists of medieval childhood can potentially learn: Social Anthropology, Sociology, Psychology, Education and Social Geography have all contributed useful information and ideas while Medicine, Pathology, Forensics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology provide many invaluable investigative techniques. But these disciplines are not generally concerned with medieval material as such, so will not be included here.

The Life and Death of a Child: Mortuary and Bodily Manifestations of Coast–Interior Interactions during the Late Formative Period (AD 100–400), Northern Chile

“…Similarly, observations for cranial porosities that could suggest nutritional deficiencies (Walker et al 2009) were made on the orbits and cranial vault. The specific etiology of skeletal lesions like cribra orbitalia is not completely understood, and as such they are frequently used as indicators of nonspecific stress, particularly in childhood (e.g., Lewis 2014). Finally, all long bones were observed for evidence of osteoperiostitis.…”