Studies of the life course in the Roman world have identified a series of demarcated stages that marked the progression from child to adult (Harlow and Laurence 2002; Rawson 2003; Laes 2011). During these transitions the infant gradually attained personhood and the child was “socialised” and prepared for adult life (McWilliam 2013: 264ff). Tables 2.1-2.5 outlines a number of formalised age stages that have relevance to Roman perceptions of the life course and the relationship between chronological age and social age-related behavioural norms. Starting with the point of birth, the conferment of personhood was not immediate, but a more gradual transition (Dasen 2013: 17-20). According to Soranus, once the midwife had inspected the child for any physical deformities, it was the Paterfamilias who decided whether to expose or keep the child (Dixon 1992: 101; Krause 2011: 627, contra Shaw 2001). This decision was one that was made very soon after birth and prior to the baby’s first bath, which was regarded as one of the first acts of acceptance (Dasen 2011: 295-297). Following this, the infant was not socially recognised by the community until their naming day (dies lustricus), which took place on the 8th or 9th day after birth, depending on sex (Harlow and Laurence 2002: 39; Rawson 2003: 111).
While many different subdivisions of the life course in life tables from the period are known (see Tables 2.1-2.5), all of them recognise this early period as a particularly vulnerable stage in the life course. The term “Infans” (which literally means “not speaking”), could be ascribed up until the age of approximately seven years (Harlow and Laurence 2002: 37). This specially denoted period of vulnerability is perhaps not surprising considering the dangers of childbirth and high infant and child mortality rates of the Roman period, with approximately 30% of all infants dying within their first year (see Parkin 2013 for discussion). Recognition of the dangers of this age is evident in large numbers of votives and gods assigned to the protection of the mother and child (Garnsey 1991: 53-4; Turcan 2001: 18-21; Ammerman 2007; Dasen 2009: 213). Evidence from historical documents also indicates a recognition of the different
psychological and physical needs of the child, with specific prescriptions for diet and treatment that differed from adults (Baker 2010: 162-7; Laes 2011: 22-50, 83). For example, the medical writer Celsus noted that diarrhoeal diseases were a common cause of death in those under the
44
Age Stage Physical Manifestations
0-7yrs Small child Teething
7-14yrs Child First facial hair
14-21yrs Teenager Full beard
21-28yrs Young Man Fully grown body
28-49yrs Adult man -
49-56yrs Older man -
56-? Old Man -
Table 2.1: Ages of Man according to pseudo-Hippocrates (Laes 2011: 89) Age Stage Celestial Body Descriptions
0-4yrs Baby Selene = Luna Only negative terms, moon moves fastest, unstable, body of the infant is soft and humid, grows rapidly and requires moist nourishment, mentally incompetent and not disciplined
5-14yrs Child Hermes = Mercury (only ½ of 20yr cycle), education is paramount, children begin to learn and talents/character form
15-22yrs Teenager Aphrodite = Venus Dominated by budding sexuality and passion, lack of restraint and reckless behaviour
23-41yrs Adult Age Helios = Sun Recklessness and playfulness make way for sobriety and more orderly conduct, desires distinction & glory 42-56yrs Manhood Ares = Mars Bringer of calamity, phase marked by physical and
mental worries, vexation and trouble, aware best years behind
57-68yrs Old Age Zeus = Jupiter More mature, exhibits foresight, prudence and sagacity and able to console others, strives for honour, respect and privilege but conducts himself with restraint and respectable composure
69-? Very Old Age
Chronos = Saturn Dark& slow planet, body and soul chill and grow weak, despondency & dissatisfaction, life becomes dull Table 2.2: Life division according to Ptolemy (Laes 2011: 90)
Age Stage 0-15yrs Puer 15-30yrs Adulescens 30-45yrs Iuvenis 45-60yrs Senior 60+yrs Senex
Table 2.3: Varro’s life table (Laes 2011: 93) Age Stage Characteristics 0-7yrs Infantia Simple life
7-14yrs Pueritia Simple life, not suited for procreation, pure age 14-28yrs Adolescentia Intellect and vigour, mature enough to procreate
28-49yrs Iuventus Intellect, vigour and physical strength, strongest of all ages 49-77yrs Senectus Intellect, vigour and maturity of mind and body, not old nor youth 77-?yrs Senium No specified age limit
Table 2.4: Division of the life course according to Isidore of Seville (after Laes 2011: 95)
Life Stage Basic Qualities Temperament Season
Child (up to 20 or 25yrs) Warm and moist Sanguine Spring
Youth (25-40yrs) Warm and dry Choleric Summer
Maturity (up to 60yrs) Cold and moist Phlegmatic Autumn
Old Age (from 60yrs) Cold and dry Melancholic Winter
45
age of ten (De Med 2.8.30), while Galen advised against the drinking of wine for children due to their already hot disposition (Dalby 2003: 84; Baker 2010: 162). Despite the use of 0-7 years as denoting a single category of “infans”, it is clear from iconographic and historical evidence that further sub-divisions were recognised (e.g. Huskinson 1996; Larsson Lovén 2013: 302ff; McWilliam 2013). For example, teething and learning to walk were also viewed as significant for the conferment of personhood, possibly denoted by a distinction between intra-mural and extra-mural burial (Pearce 2001).
Engendered identities are first observed from the age of seven years, indicated by the
application of gendered terminology that separated the sexes such as puer and puella (Harlow and Laurence 2002: 37). It is also the time that that sexuality and virginity is first attributed to children (Fraschetti 1997). From this age onwards, males and females would then have experienced different life course trajectories and social age milestones. The life course of females would have been more closely tied to the rite of marriage (Alberiei and Harlow 2007:203). While documentary evidence suggests that this may have occurred as early as twelve years in elite families (Hopkins 1965; Laurence 2000), it is likely to have occurred later for the majority of the population, probably in their late teenage years or early twenties (Shaw 1987; Saller 1994: 36). Between the ages of 14-17 years of age boys would then remove their
bulla (a protective amulet bestowed on citizen children) and replace the toga praetexta, with
the toga virilis as a sign of manhood (Harlow and Laurence 2002: 67; Rawson 2003: 323; Krause 2011: 629). Their transition to adulthood, however, was not fully complete at this age and they remained in a liminal, adolescent status until the age of 25 years. Until that time they were still considered to be prone to fickleness, irrationality and could not yet be trusted to hold office (Eyben 1993; Laurence 2000: 446). Males tended not to marry until the age of thirty years, and usually to women who were approximately ten years their junior (Parkin 1992; Saller 1994: 36).
It should be noted, however, that the age divisions given by these life tables tend to favour notions of Roman numbering systems and connections to larger systems such as astrology that may have had no bearing on the everyday perceptions of the life course (Rawson 2003: 136; Laes 2011: 88-95). Though it is noted that Galen’s prescriptions for diet and exercise in the
hygiene also follow a similar numbering system, favouring the division of life into periods of
seven years. Perhaps more important sources of key transitions of the Roman subadult life course are observed in the iconographic record, in particular depictions of the life course on the sarcophagi of Roman children (Huskinson 1996; Larsson Lovén 2013: 302ff). Common important moments recorded are the first bath, marking the official acceptance of the child
46
into the family, first steps and scenes of play (Huskinson 1996: 11). Education also seems to have been important, with depictions of lessons also commonly seen (Huskinson 1996: 11; Harlow and Laurence: 50). That the subadults buried within these coffins are sometimes younger than the depictions on them further supports these key transitions, marking the life stages denied to the family (Carroll 2006). The historical, epigraphic and iconographic evidence, although illuminating to a degree, tends to be biased towards an elite male
perspective (Prowse 2011: 411). The extent to which these clearly delineated life course stages were adhered to is unknown and this is particularly so when one attempts to understand perceptions of childhood beyond Italy to which much of this evidence pertains.