Saga - 1986, Qupperneq 120

118
HELGI ÞORLÁKSSON
* Grein þessi er ad stofni fyrirlestur sem fluttur var á ráðstefnunni Kvinders
rosengárd í Árósum í ágúst 1985. Loftur Guttormsson las yfir fyrirlesturinn og
naut ég margra góðra ábendinga hans.
Summary
This essay looks at the question of whether infants in Iceland in earlier times were
treated not with love and affection, but with indifference, or even outright malice.
One piece of evidence often cited in support of this is the fact that prior to 1800
Icelandic mothers are known to have abandoned the practice of breastfeeding their
children. This they are reputed to have done despite the fact that they knew breast
milk to be the best thing for their children. The theory argues that mothers
originally left off breastfeeding as a result of the demands of physical labour and
the agricultural calender. Parents, it is claimed, then accepted this situation as
leaving off breastfeeding was conducive to a higher degree of infant mortality,
which kept population growth in check. When breastfeeding was no longer
normal practice, this was justified by the belief that cows' milk was better for
newborn babies that mothers' milk.
The present article rejects the theory that an entire society can become indiffe-
rent to the welfare of its childrcn, accept infant mortality, and even knowingly
encourage it by denying newborn infants the breast. Rather it is suggested that
love and care were the rule in the treatment of young children, although there will
of course always have been exceptions to this rule.
The explanations offered by Icelanders themselves in the 18th and 19th centuries
for the pretermission of breastfeeding were primarily two: firstly, that the work
load forced women to leave off breastfeeding; and secondly, that breast milk was
not as good for children as cows' milk, or even downright unhealthy. The idea
that the demands of physical labour can have caused mothers to leave off
breastfeeding is here rejected: this cannot have been the primary cause. On the
other hand, the belief that mothers* milk had only limited nutritional value "
wasn't as „good“ as cows‘ milk — can, it is argued, have been the main reason why
women gave up the practice.
Theories as to the limited value of mothers' milk due to worries and difíiculties
were known in Rome around 150 AD, and became quite common in foreign
publications from the 16th century onwards. Thcy can have influenced opinion m
Iceland through a number of channels. It is here suggested that these ideas gained
currency in Iceland when the period of convalescence became shorter after the
Reformation, when it was no longer believed that women were „unclean" f°r
forty days following childbirth, and women could resume normal life as soon as
possible. The reason for this shorter period of convalescence was probably l^e
demands of the household, although it is also possible that women took some
pride in returning as quickly as possible to normal life. But in 1540, Petet