Hi
What exactly were the criteria for fitness to live according to Spartiate priests? What marks/skull shape/ anatomical features did they inspect to determine if an infant lived or died? Were the ‘unfit’ ones merely expose or actually killed?
I look forward to your feedback
We don’t actually know for sure that the Spartans did this, or if they did it systematically. Sources which describe the practice are not contemporary, so far as I know, and this could be a tale that grew in the telling.
If they did, it was something only done to the children of citizens, who were a relatively small elite. It’s unlikely that many children died this way, if only because of the need not to deplete the citizen class even further.
I don’t think there’s any suggestion that the decision was made on the basis of marks or physical features (other, presumably, than obvious physical disabilities). My guess is that the inspection looked for sickly infants, those that were failing to thrive. Those who failed whatever visual test was applied were not killed; they were exposed for a set time and, if they did not die, were taken back in and raised as if they had passed the test.
There is a tradition in Nordic countries called utburd, literally “child carried outside”. Basically, anyone in those civilizations could decide infanticide was the correct decision, basically by the time of year – a child born, late in fall or during winter, was essentially doomed, no matter what its visible health. Probably biased by how many children there were already, and the families fortune. I believe the father of a family of Democratic and Imperial Rome held the same authority.
So, what have we got:
– Obvious deformities – genetic, or Erb’s Palsy as affected on Kaiser Wilhelm
– Obvious low birth weight – pretty much the definition of “sickly”
– maybe the infant respires slowly or with difficulty? – is that a thing that happens even now? I was a few weeks premature, and had to stay in an incubator for a month with an oxygen tube up my nose (thay’d just discovered oxygen tents blinded infants at that point) I doubt the Spartans had anything approaching that level of neonate care.
– maybe the above were biased by: other healthy children in the family, or biased against infanticide by a lack of surviving children after multiple tries
– gender bias – after 5 healthy daughters, maybe the sixth, with the slightest flaw was just cast away?
Maybe the most important thing was the reminder of the totalitarian nature of this culture. “Oh, citizen, you like living in our State, the safety and security it provides, free meals while you’re serving in our Military, good pension plan, yes? Ok. The State is going to inspect your babies now Don’t question it.”
As UDS points out, we actually know very little about the Spartans’ practices and everyday life. What little has come down to us is from later sources that are obviously either pro-Spartan or anti-Spartan. It’s interesting that sometimes the descriptions of Spartan culture are identical, but held up as examples of BOTH how the Spartans were great and how they were jerks.
If it was exposure, what are the odds that some non-citizen family would then come along and take in the kid? Children were considered quite valuable, for most of human history.
It seems like a go-to way to generate a hero and/or leader.
Finger of a birth-strangled babe
Ditch delivered by a drab
Quoth the Bard, casually. What’d you expect a whore to do, after 10 lunar cycles of probably zero prenatal care, and no prospect of neonatal support? Deliver in a ditch, strangle it, and maybe the local witch would spare some cash for the parts. No man decided this – not the family patriarch, not the Ephors or other priests. Heck, when Iceland became Christian, the Church said non-Christians could keep this and other traditions. (Became illegal only when Iceland was completely Christianized.)
As was mentioned this is just pro- or anti- Spartan propaganda on the totalitarian nature of their local government. Many societies had secret or not so secret traditions such as this. And the live or die criteria really just boiled down to mamma’s or pappa’s mood or opinion on viability sometimes.
Maybe they knew it was inevitable, and they called the priests in for a rubber stamp. “Look at us, what good citizens we are. Validate our decision.”
What I’m saying is, we may not know the Priest’s criteria, but we have abundant evidence of people practicing infanticide without applying any real criteria at all. Maybe the priests just blessed a decision that everyone would have culturally, socially and economically agreed with anyway.