How have children been viewed in the past?

Question

Today it seems to me that children have many rights and are viewed as human beings that need to be treated with respect and dignity. How were children viewed in the past? Property? Slaves?

Answer 1

In the past, children were to be seen and not heard. They were to respect their elders and instead of carrying on, they were supposed to be quiet and learn from their elders.

Answer 2

There was a greater amount of diversity toward children then these answers might suggest. Quite a bit depended upon the society and most importantly one's status in society. The wealthy have always been able to indulge their children, those that made it to adulthood could be expected to be fed & educated with a goal toward becoming useful members of society. The Middle and Poorer classes, it could be argued, treated their children as 'property,' mostly it was a wait & see atttude toward when the child would be mature enough & strong enough to help with either home & farm work or to actually go out into the world and work. In Scotch & Welsh Minining Villages children began earning a wage 'for their family' as early as eight or ten. It was actually argued that it bred character and it was true that small children could crawl into small spaces where adults could not, thus they were invaluable down 'in the hole.' In many New England textile mills one could find entire families working. It only seemed to make sense to give an eight year old a menial task to do - - - many jobs in the mills merely required a person to make a series of repetitve moves such as wrapping yarn around a spindle. Many parents perhaps felt better knowing where their children were at even if that meant a ten year old was pushing a wheelbarrow or a broom in the next room.

Overall children were adults in miniature and few thought it unusual for boys & girls to start their adult life in their early teens, many early American marriage Laws were set at Fourteen after contentious debate that the age should be twelve. Many a Sixteen year old male was already working full time and expected too start a family. Things began to shift in America during the 1920's and 30's and many social historians argue that Movies had a lot to do with it. Showing an 'idealic' representation of family life that became the norm by the 1950's. Peace.

PS - - - Yes many pictures seem to show children dressed in garb suggesting miniture adults however if one looks at most clothing little has truly changed.

Answer 3

I suppose this would depend on the society in question, though in general children were treated as the "property" of their parents until they came of age - though this seems to have been a privilege extended only to boys, and not to girls. Boys often were allowed to grow up and then they had to undergo some form of "rite of passage," which would then signal their entrance into the adult world, with all its corresponding rights and responsibilities. Girls were (and in some societies, still are) considered property, going from the household of their parents to the households of their husbands when they were old enough for marriage. For a very long time, only boys could have a proper education that would permit them to become scholars and businessmen, while girls could only learn enough to manage a household.

A lot of books and movies provide a glimpse regarding this gender-based divide between the upbringing of boys and girls throughout history, so look it up and you may bring something up.

As for abuse and maltreatment, again that depended. Children from the lower classes were more prone to becoming the victims of abuse, not just from their parents, but also from those who belonged to a higher class than they did. Children born to the nobility or to wealthier families often did not suffer physical abuse, but they could be abused in other ways, most likely verbally or emotionally, and on some occasions sexually as well.

Answer 4

Children were treated as property. This is the reason that children (and wives) bear the name of the man of the house. Because they were property, they could be sold into slavery, etc. Also, many children didn't live to maturity (14-16 years old), and so great affection was conserved. They weren't even worthy of "children" clothes. You can see this in old Rembrandt paintings. The children look odd in "grown-up" looking clothes.

Answer 5

children had to work in mines and factories for long hours, and weren't paid much. the child labor law was passed in the 1800's. now any chid under the age of 14 cannot apply for a job.

Answer 6

Property...even now, they are still sometimes treated as a symbol in certain families as representing ownership or heritage of future fortune. In certain country, people prefer to give birth to boy; while in someother country, people like to raise their daughter as big and strong as a cow...

Answer 7

As cheap labor, a source of income for the parents.

Answer 8

Good little kids who are well trained and listen to the dictator.

Answer 9

as slaves, the parents did not even have to allow them to wear clothes if that were there wish. sad, isn't it?

Answer 10

They were property