4.3 Article

Isotopic evidence for breastfeeding and possible adult dietary differences from Late/Sub-Roman Britain

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 129, Issue 1, Pages 45-54

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.20244

Keywords

stable isotopes; weaning; paleodiet; Romans; Queenford Farm

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Historical documents indicate that breastfeeding and weaning practices have fluctuated in England through history. In order to obtain evidence for general breastfeeding patterns in Late/Sub-Roman Britain, stable carbon and nitrogen isotope values were measured in juvenile and adult skeletons (n = 87) from the cemetery of Queenford Farm Dorchester-on-Thames, Oxfordshire. As the site contained few individuals between 0-1.5 years of age, it was not possible to determine the initial timing for the introduction of weaning foods. Between ages 2-4 years, the mean +/- SD delta C-13 results (-20.2 +/- 0.3 parts per thousand) are significantly more negative (t = -4.03, P < 0.001) compared to adult females (-19.7 +/- 0.3%.). This is interpreted as evidence of a different diet being fed to children during weaning. After age 2, the delta N-15 values gradually decline, indicating complete cessation of breastfeeding by 3-4 years. Among adults, stature (males = 1.68 +/- 0.06 m; females = 1.58 +/- 0.07 m) and sexual dimorphism (106) were low, suggesting that the population was possibly under environmental stress. The 613 C results for adults are similar, but females show a small but statistically significantly (t = -2.86, P < 0.01) lower mean delta N-15 value (9.9 +/- 0.9 parts per thousand) Compared to males (10.6 +/- 0.5 parts per thousand). These lower female delta N-15 values possibly reflect the different physiology of the sexes (pregnancy and/or lactation) or the reduced consumption of animal/fish protein by women, and this may have been influenced by individual preference, family needs, or societal values of the era.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available