Course:ARCL140 Summer2020/TermProject Group7

From UBC Wiki

Child Rearing Practices

CONTRIBUTORS & ROLES

Introduction, Conclusion and Editing completed collaboratively by Abby, Allison, Elaine, and Harrison.

Site 1- Abby Egger

Site 2- Elaine Nesbitt

Site 3- Allison Cadigal

Site 4- Harrison Rockel

MAP

LINK to MyMap

Site No. Site Name Coordinates
1 Melka Kunture 8.70509, 38.5991
2 Rouffignac Cave 45.0032, 0.59150
3 The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia 37.08287, 22.43511
4 Amud Cave 32.94571, 35.29655

INTRODUCTION

Child-rearing is an integral aspect of hominin culture that follows the trajectory of child-rearing practices. Alloparenting and social learning techniques informs our understanding of how cultural signs and symbols are transmitted. Not only do they influence reproductive success regarding inclusive fitness, but they also tell us how rearing strategies can change over consecutive generations.[1] Child-rearing practices provides insight into different social behaviours and interactions among hominids and helps us to understand the origins of our behaviours. As they differ culturally, understanding these distinguishable traits lay the groundwork for the development of evolution. Therefore, we will be tracing the evolution of alloparenting, social learning, and cultural transmission and how it positions us, modern Homo sapiens, within a greater behavioural taxonomy of hominids overtime. These sites will elaborate on child rearing practices by delving into the archaeological findings in Melka Kunture, Ethiopia and the Rouffignac cave in Dordogne France, with a focus on archeological child rearing theory. Then, we will branch into the cultural dispositions, learning techinques and kinships developed at the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia and the Neanderthal settlement, the Amud Cave.

The sites are described as follows:

  1. The Gombore II-2 site at Melka Kunture, Ethiopia, is a set of 700,000 year old footprints that gives insight into the complex history of hominin child rearing.[2] Through various placements in footprints, bone fragments, and tools, it helps create an archaeological understanding for the history of hominin alloparenting and social learning.[2] Furthermore, Gombore II-2 situates the importance of communal and social rearing strategies in hominins.
  2. Chamber A1 in the Rouffignac cave in Dordogne, France consists of a collection of 13,000 year old engravings known as flutings that reveal the symbolic behaviour of children as pleistocene artists.[3] It is an important archaeological site as it informs our understanding of alloparenting and social learning as a collaborative effort between adults and their young. Furthermore, it debunks previous assumptions that cave art was solely carried out by men.
  3. Excavations from the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia in Sparta, Greece revealed a large portion of the artifacts aligning with cult-like behavior which influenced alleged rearing practices in the site.[4] Understanding the context of the sanctuary informs a greater understanding for how child- bearing and rearing practices came to fruition in Sparta and how different aspects of alloparenting and social learning were evident in their culture.
  4. Amud Cave, a Neanderthal settlement researched for its well preserved human remains and the mortuary practices evident from the care put into the body's burials[5]. While it has long been held that Neanderthals lead difficult and harsh lives that extended to their childhoods and younger years, recent research suggests that the differences between early human childhoods and those of the Neanderthals are few, and very subtle[6]. Neanderthal young adults and youths (including neonates and infants) are often highly represented in burial plots[6]. While before this was attributed to the aforementioned harsh lifestyle of the Neanderthal it is now believed to be a result of special attention paid to the burials of the young, possibly due to a greater degree of integration into family systems than their human counterparts[6].

SITE 1: Melka Kunture - Gombore II-2

AUTHOR: Abby Egger

LOCATION: located in the upper Awash Valley, Ethiopia (N 8°42.284′; E 38°36.098′).[2]

AGE: the Gombore II-2 site is dated to about 700,000 years ago during the African[7] Acheulean Age.

Context

The Gombore II-2 site at Melka Kunture is a series of well preserved prehistoric hominin footprints dating back nearly 700,000 years in Ethiopia’s upper Awash Valley. Melka Kunture is located next to the Awash River, making it a diversely fertile environment within the Savannah.[7] Hippopotamus footprints are also preserved at Gombore II-2 and have remained a near-constant presence over the last 700,000 years, even while temperature and humidity fluctuated during the Pleistocene.[7] Nearby volcanoes erupted periodically, covering Melka Kunture in volcanic ash, and preserved the prehistoric footprints we see today.[2]

History

Melka Kunture was first discovered in 1963 by Gerard Dekker.[7] The first group to research the site was a French mission led by Jean Chavaillon in 1965. Melka Kunture was a French expedition for most of the 20th century.[2] Since 1999, present research and further investigations are being held by the Sapienza University of Rome.[2] Altogether, Melka Kunture is a vast, well preserved, and diverse site that provides insight into a number of different periods of hominin development in Africa.[8]

Relevance

The Gombore II-2 site at Melka Kunture is important in understanding the development and history of hominin childbearing and childcare as it records interactions between hominin adults and children (perhaps some as young as a year old).[2] This array of tracks supports the idea that early hominins were collected in larger groups of “mixed age assemblage” or that hominis of all ages interacted as they foraged and moved across the Savannah.[2] Gombore II-2 is particularly interesting as the number and location of footprints, bone fragments, and tools suggest three pertinent insights into prehistoric childcare: the suggestion of group child rearing (or alloparenting); children may have accompanied adults during mobile activities such as hunting or foraging; and in conjunction with the last point, children may have begun “to learn first-hand information about hunting and butchering” from as early as a year old.[2] Therefore, while Gombore II-2 contains very little information on offspring rearing strategies or early hominin reproduction it is extremely useful in understanding the use of social learning and alloparenting in hominin development.

Footprints allow anthropologists to study “group composition and behavior,” with the Gombore II-2 tracks being a mixture of children and adults.[9] Therefore, Gombore II-2 has been interpreted by some researchers as an example of early hominin alloparenting. This is due to the mixed-aged group and the ways in which the footprints interact and overlap, suggesting children (at least for the period of time preserved by the volcanic ash) were watched by a group of adults, not just the child's direct parents.[2] As well, the conjunction of tools, bone fragments, and footprints suggest that children were taught skills such as “tool making, tool using and butchery behaviours” through observing adults and imitation from a young age.[2]

Overall, the ideas of alloparenting and social learning in hominins from 700,000 years ago help humans understand our contemporary childcare and its development. Through the footprints at Gombore II-2 anthropologists can infer that our hominin ancestors were social creators. As well, the footprints suggest parents were willing to allow other members of their group to interact or care for their children (a contrast from almost all modern great apes/monkeys). Also, the evidence of social learning/teaching suggests that from a young age hominins learned in a fairly similar way to contemporary humans, suggesting learning and development has stayed fairly consistent over the last 700,000 years. In all, Gombore II-2 in Melka Kunture is a good place to start when juxtaposing the similarities and differences of hominid child care throughout cultures and time.

SITE 2: Rouffignac Cave - Chamber A1

AUTHOR: Elaine Nesbitt

LOCATION: 5km South of Rouffignac in Dordogne, France (45°00′32″N 0°59′15″E).[10]

AGE: 13,000 years Before Present [BP], during the Upper Paleolithic Period.[11]

Context

The Rouffignac cave in Dordogne, France, also known as “The Cave of a Hundred Mammoths,” is a complex 8km cave system that contains over 350 engravings and paintings dating back to the Upper Paleolithic period.[12] The cave is of particular importance due to the presence of finger flutings, which are lines drawn on the limestone walls in soft clay by one’s fingers. There are nine chambers in total in the cave, each with unique types of flutings. Chamber A1, located 300 metres from the entrance is of particular importance due to the presence of flutings with finger widths that demonstrate that they were made by children.[13]

History

François de Belleforest discovered the flutings in 1575, but it wasn’t until 1956 that Henri Breuil authenticated them as Paleolithic works.[14] Most of the research to date was carried out by Leslie Van Gerber and Kevin Sharpe, who established methodologies to study both the flutings and the unique identities of the markers.[11] Gerber and Sharpe were some of the first to reveal the symbolic behaviour of children in the paleolithic, as well as the role of women and children in the creation of cave art.[15]

Relevance

Chamber A1 provides a rich source of information regarding child rearing through the transmission of cultural knowledge through art.[3] Analysis of the flutings’ structure, heights and the finger width between the markings were used to approximate the age, gender, unique signature marks, and behavioral interactions between the adults and children.[3]

Some researchers have previously interpreted flutings as forms of mundane art, linked to initiation ceremonies, and shamanic rituals solely carried out by adult men.[15] However, based on forensic research, it is plausible that fluting was also a communal activity carried out by children in the company of adults. Evidence to support this is the presence of flutings of varied finger widths, which can be used as a tool for age approximation. Based on this, Leslie Van Gelder (2015) discovered that "fluting widths of 22mm to 28mm were made by children between the ages of 2-5 years in concert with some adults (34mm to 41mm)."[15]

The role of adults seems to be a collaborative effort with the children, incorporating the use of social learning and opportunity scaffolding.[16] This is evident with the presence of flutings on the ceilings as high as 1.8m, suggesting that children would have to be hoisted up in order to make the markings.[12] Additionally, the presence of tectiforms, which are hut-shaped engravings produced by one of the children and a recognized sign explicitly found in France, shows levels of cultural transmission in figurative art production. The capacity to make the cultural signs and symbols is congruent with children today who are able to write their names as early as the age of four.[12]

The discovery of flutings as far as 1km into the cave "suggests the children to be agile and comfortable with a fair degree of exploration."[12] The cave itself has been likened to a “prehistoric playpen” due to the ease of access between the chambers as compared to other caves in the region, coupled with flutings predominantly made by children, and the minimal nature of fluting finger widths above 28mm suggesting adult markings. This suggests that few adults both accompanied and taught the children the cultural signs and symbols.[17] This provides insight into the mechanisms of allo-parenting and social interactions between them as a form of child rearing.

SITE 3: The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia

AUTHOR: Allison Cadigal

LOCATION:  Located in the South banks of the Eurotas River, Northwest of the Ancient Spartan Polis.[18] (37° 04' 58.80" N; 22° 26' 6.00" E)[19]

AGE: Roughly 2,800 years old, dating back to the 9th century B.C.[20]

Context

The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia was founded in Ancient Sparta near the town of Limon. It currently sits on the outskirts of Sparta, Greece nestled between the banks of Limnae and the Eurotas river.[18] Ecologically, the shrine has undergone significant changes and has been destroyed and restored numerous times over several centuries.[21] After severe flooding in the 6th century BCE, the site subsequently rose above sea level, sealing artifacts beneath a bed of sand.[22] Though the sanctuary is a series of temples dedicated to the Spartan Goddess, Artemis Orthia, a large portion of the activity that occurred there is a mystery. However, it was notable for having an archaic alter which scholars suggest, hosted flogging ceremonies where young boys fought to prove their allegiance and were beaten, throttled, and lashed as part of their training.[23] During the ceremonies, it is suggested that Orthia would oversee the young boys' who fought, and found satisfaction watching the bloodshed.[23] Beatings and jousts were common in the children's daily lives, and were a regular occurrence as warfare played a pivotal role in Spartan culture. Their child-rearing strategies were often considered callous compared to other city-states in Greece. However, it was primarily a way to educate and train their youth to serve the state.

History

The site was founded in 1906 then excavated from 1906-1910 by Richard M. Dawkins and the British Archaeological School of Athens.[18] The excavation revealed many artifacts that arguably aligned with cult-like behaviors; terracotta masks, figurines, ivory carvings, pottery and “fragments of charred bone” from animal sacrifices.[4] In addition, an “archaic altar” (which remains intact today) was excavated and was where a large portion of sacrifices and rituals occurred.[4] Overall, the findings of the sanctuary support a religious and physically taxing form of education that was intended for Spartan youth to prove their warrior-ship.

Relevance

The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia reflects government-mandated training evident in Spartan childhood. Child-rearing practices in Sparta often amounted to harsh discipline, ritual beatings, and children exposed to infallible conditions. Mothers were tasked with the goal to produce strong and fearless soldiers. Therefore, their values emulated a framework that killed the weak and fostered the brave, so viable fitness opportunities were often challenged as Sparta operated on “a system of eugenic selection.”[24] The state killed babies who were deemed unfit as a form of phenotypic selection to encourage the reproduction of desirable traits, which potentially led to a reduction in genetic diversity and an increase of inbreeding over subsequent generations.[24] In addition, rearing options were not decided by the parents. Instead, babies were evaluated by elders in their community, analyzed based on their structural build, and subsequently doused in wine to challenge their senses.[24] The babies who were physically or mentally deformed, or distressed became slaves (Helots) or were left to die and brought to Taygetos “mountain where hyenas lurked.”[25] To children, punishment was a form of education, and in fact, they were “encouraged to steal food.”[26] In many cases, cheese was often placed in the altar of the sanctuary to lure them yet they were proceeded to be severely beaten.[26]

Moreover, social interaction with their families was uncommon, as many of the young boys left home at the age of seven to pursue military training. Children, specifically male, were primarily raised by nurses (alloparenting) until they entered the agoge system while their mothers were managing the household.[27] Many of the Spartan nurses were highly sought after by the parents, and instilled values that were particularly unconventional.[27] Much of those values provided the children with a broad exposure to new cultural and social perspectives. Subsequently, the children were raised in groups with other Spartans where they were exposed to rigorous physical and mental training; various aspects of distributive learning were evident as social interaction in these situations was often group oriented without the supervision of their caretakers.

As it stands, child-rearing outcomes were very much informed by the training programs themselves versus the parents. As a result, children were bred under state-sanctioned control, and minimal opportunities were given for the parents to implement their child bearing and rearing strategies, leading to complications in genetic diversity and reduced fitness. Although a significant portion of that was informed culturally by Spartan values, rearing opportunities were often hindered, and children were primarily raised under the supervision of the state and nurses (alloparenting), which led to their role as collective soldiers rather than independent people. The findings at the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia maps onto the cultural dispositions of Spartan society and illuminates reproductive strategies and child rearing practices evident in eugenic selection, alloparenting, and social learning.

SITE 4: Amud Cave

Author: Harrison Rockel

Location: Discovered in Israel overlooking the Amud Gorge and Northwest of Lake Tiberias.

(32.9457° N, 35.2966° E)

Age: Remains recovered are an estimated 50,000 to 70,000 years old.

Context

The cave exists “on the margin of the Dead Sea Rift Valley” and is composed of “a small chamber (some 7 by 5 m), a large open ‘middle’ terrace (25 by 12 m), and a lower terrace that is actually a steep slope toward the channel bed”.[5] The cave is in proximity to a series of others peppering the region possibly used as alternative shelters for the same group as they obtained resources from different stretches of the landscape. The Amud Cave is notable for its remarkably well persevered lithic and skeletal remains which give us clearer insight into the cultural usages of these materials. The surprising preservation of the remains can be attributed to a purposeful burial of the dead with a possible specific emphasis on mortuary rituals for the young of the group.

History

The remains of those who once occupied the cave can be dated to the Middle Paleolithic.[28] The cave remained relatively undisturbed until excavations by the University of Tokyo in 1961 and again in 1964, which uncovered the well preserved yet incomplete remains of several Neanderthals within the cave system as well as materials indicating tool-making (flaked blades) and mortuary rituals such as burial accompaniments including animal bones.[28] In 1991, the cave was opened again for research by a joint Israeli-American archaeological team which uncovered the remains of several youths and infants buried in more sheltered areas of the cave.[28]

Relevance

It has long been held that Neanderthals lived harsh, trying lives, the hardships of which extended to and were even emphasized in childhood. The burial record of many Neanderthal habitats disproportionately represent the remains of young adults and youths (including neonates and infants). Most of the young adult deaths are attributed to “frequent hunting injuries” and attacks by other animals, or violent deaths in short. But the picture painted of a life in which an inordinately high rate of individuals die before reaching reproductive age “hardly represents a viable population,” and thus requires reconsideration.[6] While neanderthals had a prolonged developmental period akin to that of humans meaning that they had a biological childhood, there is also archaeological evidence of a cultural childhood as well. Certain artifacts recovered from Neanderthal encampments are argued to have been purposefully created as children’s toys. For example, a handaxe from the Lower Paleolithic measuring only 4.4cm. The “exceptionally small size and replication of the standard tool shape, plus the abundance of flint material for producing a larger functional tool” clearly “supports the proposal that this was made for a small child”.[6] Neanderthal children then must have received transmissions of cultural behaviours and attitudes of significance from their adult handlers. But evidence of distinctly childish behaviours go beyond the mimicking of adults. The Roche-Cotard mask found at a Neanderthal site is a stone replication of a human face. While many interpret the mask as being made of a specific child, other interpretations suggest that it was instead “made for an infant”.[6] This goes so far as to say that symbolic objects “play a distinctive internal role” with regards to the specific groups of Neanderthals themselves, not least of all because “there is little motivation to impress outsiders”.[6]

While it has been established that the original picture of Neanderthal life was greatly different from their early human counterparts, an inspection of their lifestyle has now focused on “more subtle aspects” of their lifestyle and ecology.[6] For example,“Neanderthal groups have largely been interpreted as small, and relatively isolated” with a “potential maximum of about 28” for group sizes.[6] This may have come down to their ecology, as “the pronounced robusticity of Neanderthals implies high energy demand,” meaning that smaller, more isolated populations would have been more viable than larger more sociable ones.[6] It is here that the aforementioned subtle differences between Neanderthal and early human childhoods may lie. As in smaller, more isolated groups with a continual social makeup, the patterns of connection may shift to an internal rather than external emphasis. Whereas early human social dynamics had to contend with the maintenance of internal relations within a group as well as the external relations of one group to another, the Neanderthal’s “tendency to not interact with neighbors need not imply competition.”[6] More energy could be funneled away from antisocial behaviours and toextremelywards reinforcing a set of pro-social behaviours applied to the internal connections of the group. It is not uncommon to find “serious but healed” wounds among members of the population as well as others in positions that would have put a dependency strain on the group at large including those with “extreme walking difficulties” and a child with craniosynostosis who was given “equal support” despite severe mental and operational handicaps.[6]

When this cultural emphasis on care is considered in tandem with the fact that neanderthal children only reached biological adulthood at 15 years of age indicates high parental investment, we stumble on very familiar territory.[6] The only way a culture could bear the combined brunt of the dependency stemming from their children and their incapacitated successfully enough for their young to survive to reproductive age is through alloparenting, and possibly with a more powerful emphasis on it at that. This underlines that despite the ecological and social differences of neanderthals, the experience of a childhood and the connection to larger dynamics by which one receives a cultural transmission is found even across species.

CONCLUSION

The objective of our project was to trace the archaeological findings of child rearing practices in different cultures, and further demonstrate how elements of alloparenting, social learning, and cultural transmission are evident. We explored the ancient ruins of Melka Kunture - Gombore II-2 in Ethiopia, and Rouffignac Cave in France, focusing on archaeological child rearing theory. These theories are based around the communal aspects of hominin life, delving into the history of social and community based learning. Then we went on to the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia in Greece and Amund Cave in Israel to uncover the cultural dispositions, learning techniques,  and kinships evident in their rearing practices. Based on objective archaeological research, our findings cite a multidimensional view of childrearing values. Through the juxtaposition of these diverse archaeological sites, the integral aspects of hominin and modern human child rearing are brought forward. Alloparenting is seen in multiple forms from the Temple of Artemis Orthia to Rouffignac Cave. Here, it is interesting to see how alloparenting persists across thousands of years yet can change drastically to fit the current culture.

There is evidence that social learning and alloparenting has always been important to hominin success, and are the main aspects that make our child raising very different from great apes. In addition, the collaborative effort between parents and children is essential in the transmission of cultural symbols found in figurative art production. Through the incorporation of social learning and opportunity scaffolding techniques, we identified that learning has remained fairly consistent throughout the genus Homo life histories. Cultural significance and social dynamics between neanderthals and children is indicative, and child rearing is a deterministic factor of life history, whether they are early human neanderthals or modern humans. However different, they are valued for human development and there is an inherent gravitation towards child rearing. Following a similar thread, child bearing practices in Spartan culture greatly influenced the implications of genetic diversity and reduced fitness due to eugenic selection. Many babies were weeded out by their deformities and imperfections while other children were raised under the supervision of the state and exposed to new cultural and social values from their counterparts. The flogging rituals and cult-like artifacts in the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia provide a broader context for how rearing practices were evident in Sparta Culture. This is a major break from the other sites, as at the Temple of Artemis Orthia has a negative social, evolutional, and cultural effect, whereas in Amud Cave, Rouffignac Cave, and Melka Kunture the general trend is towards positive childhood development. Overall, we examined how child rearing practices throughout time and cultures offer a broader context for understanding how alloparenting, social learning, and cultural transmission has shaped hominid evolution.

REFERENCES

  1. ↑ Kramer, Karen L. "Cooperative Breeding and Its Significance to the Demographic Success of Humans". Annual Review of Anthropology. 39: 417–436.
  2. ↑ 2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 Altamura, Flavio; Bennett, Matthew R; D’Aout, Kristiaan; Gaudzinski-Windheurse, Sabine; Melis, Rita T.; Reynolds, Sally C.; Mussi, Margherita (2018). "Archaeology and Ichnology at Gombore II-2, Melka Kunture, Ethiopia: Everyday Life of a Mixed-Age Hominin Group 700,000 Years Ago". Scientific Report. 8: 1–11.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Bednarik, Robert (2008). "Children as Pleistocene Artists". The Journal of Australian Rock Art. 25 (2): 173–182.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Dawkins, R. M., ed. (1915). The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta. London: Richard Clay and Sons. pp. 1–10.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Madella, Marco; Jones, Martin K.; Goldberg, Paul; Goren, Yuval; Hovers, Erella (2002). "The Exploitation of Plant Resources by Neanderthals in Amud Cave (Israel): The Evidence from Phytolith Studies". Journal of Archaeological Science. 29 (7): 703–719.
  6. ↑ 6.00 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.10 6.11 6.12 Spikins, Penny; Hitchens, Gail; Needham, Andy; Rutherford, Holly (August 2014). "The Cradle of Thought: Growth, Learning, Play and Attachment in Neanderthal Children". Oxford Journal of Archaeology. 33 (2): 111–134.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Sapeinza Univerita di Roma. "Melka Kunture". Retrieved June 9, 2020.
  8. ↑ Mendez-Quintas, Eduardo; Panera, Jaoquin; Altamura, Flavio; Di Bianco, Luca; Melis, Rita T.; Piarulli, Flavia; Ruta, Giancarlo; Mussi, Margherita (August 2019). "Gombore II (Melka Kunture, Ethiopia): A New Approach to Formation Processes and Spatial Patterns of an Early Pleistocene Acheulean Site". Journal of Archaeological Science. 108: 1–23.
  9. ↑ Hatala, Kevin G.; Roach, Neil T.; Ostrofsky, Kelly R.; Wunderlich, Roshna E.; Dingwall, Heather L.; Villmoare, Brian A.; Green, David J.; Harris, John W. K.; Braun, David R. (2016). "Footprints Reveal Direct Evidence of Group Behaviour and Locomotion in Homo erectus". Scientific Reports. 6: 1–9.
  10. ↑ The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. "Prehistoric Sites and Decorated Caves Of The Vézère Valley". Retrieved June 10, 2020.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Sharpe, Kevin; Van Gelder, Leslie (2006). "Evidence for Cave Marking by Palaeolithic Children". Antiquity. 80 (310): 937–947.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 Van Gelder, Leslie (2015). "Counting the Children: The Role of Children in the Production of Finger Flutings in Four Upper Palaeolithic Caves". Oxford Journal of Archaeology. 34: 119–138.
  13. ↑ Bednarik, Robert (2008). "Children as Pleistocene Artists". Rock Art Research: The Journal of Australian Rock Art. 25 (2): 173–182.
  14. ↑ Smith, Philip E. L. (1962). "The Abbé Henri Breuil and Prehistoric Archaeology". Anthropologica. 4 (2): 199–208.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 Van Gelder, Leslie; Sharpe, Kevin (2009). "Women and Girls as Upper Palaeolithic Cave 'Artists': Deciphering The Sexes Of Finger Fluters In Rouffignac Cave". Oxford Journal of Archaeology. 28 (4): 323–333.
  16. ↑ Hewlett, Barry (May 1, 2014). "CARTA: Childrearing in Human Evolution -- Barry Hewlett: Sharing Childcare and Knowledge in Infancy". YouTube. University of California Television (UCTV). Retrieved June 16, 2020.
  17. ↑ "Cave Artwork Shines a Light on Prehistoric Playpens". The Times. Retrieved June 16, 2020.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Waugh, Nicki (2009). "Visualising Fertility at Artemis Orthia's Site". British School at Athens Studies. 16: 159–167.
  19. ↑ "GPS Coordinates of Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, Greece. Latitude: 37.0830 Longitude: 22.4350". Latitude. Retrieved June 13, 2020.
  20. ↑ "Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, Sparta". The Fitzwilliam Museum. Retrieved June 13, 2020.
  21. ↑ Ma Vazquez Hoys, Ana. "Templos Griegos: Templos Edad Obscra y Arcaica, Templo de Artemis Orthia, Esparta". Retrieved June 13, 2020.
  22. ↑ Suddaby, Toryn (2014). "Masks and Maidens: Women and the Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia". Constellations. 6: 1–7.
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 Léger, Ruth Marie (2015). Artemis and Her Cult. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 Bhattacharyya, Kaustav (April 28, 2018). "Legacy of Sparta's Children Continues to Haunt the West". The Sunday Guardian Live. Retrieved June 13, 2020.
  25. ↑ Loefler, Imre (August 13, 2005). "Healthism and Eugenics". BMJ: British Medical Journal. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Powell, Anton, ed. (2017). A Companion to Sparta. Somerset: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 Pomeroy, Sarah B. (2002). Spartan Women. London: Oxford University Press. p. 98.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 28.2 The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, ed. (July 13, 2006). "Amud". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved June 17, 2020.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:ARCL140_Summer2020/TermProject_Group7&oldid=603646"