LATE ANTIQUE CULTURE AND PRIVATE LIFEChristianity made little difference to the morals of that court at least, except
perhaps when a bold bishop dared to intervene. As for society in general, it
is hard to know how much difference the general approval given to asceti-
cism made in the sexual lives of the majority. While many sermons exhorted
Christians to sexual continence, it would be natural to assume that there was
in practice a gap between what was claimed by the preacher and the real situ-
ation. It would be equally dangerous, however, to conclude that they had no
effect at all, and the large number of surviving saints’ lives makes plain the
extent to which such attitudes were presented as an ideal.^55 This does not
mean of course that existing sexual practice changed dramatically in all, or
even in many, cases. Only inscriptions can give much statistical information
about family size in the ancient world (and even these are deceptive, for we
rarely have a large enough statistical sample). On this basis a recent study con-
cludes that there was no real difference between pagan and Christian families.
It is interesting to fi nd that among the better-off classes, which were able
to afford funerary monuments, a family size comparable with the modern
nuclear family seems to have been the norm. The church condemned contra-
ception with a vehemence that suggests that it was seen as widely practised,
but there were other means of limitation of family size, including the sale of
infants and infanticide by exposure, a long-established practice in the ancient
world.^56
It would be a mistake to romanticize marriage or family life in the late
empire – for most people, it remained both brutal and fundamentally asym-
metrical, as can be seen from Augustine’s discussion of the role of the father
in the City of God, where what is emphasized above all is the power relation in
which he stood towards the rest of the household, starting with his wife;^57 he
also wrote a treatise ‘On the good of marriage’ and had had a longstanding
concubine himself and the prospect of a marriage arranged by his mother.^58
In some Latin works of the fi fth and sixth centuries, we do fi nd more atten-
tion, even if somewhat equivocal, being paid to the role of Christian wives
and mothers.^59 But life expectancy remained short, especially for women of
child-bearing age, and infant mortality was high, while the methods available
for limitation of families (not necessarily with the consent of the mother)
were crude and painful. As for children, they are often the forgotten people
in ancient sources, and it is not much easier to fi nd evidence about their lives
than it is in earlier periods.^60 This does not mean that individuals did not care
about the children, but it does mean that children themselves were still given
a low priority in the written record, a fact signifi cant in itself. The Gospel say-
ings about children (see Matt. 19:14) lagged far behind those about rich and
poor in their actual social effect.
Yet even on a minimalist view, the drain of individuals and resources from
family control to the church in its various forms clearly did have a profound
effect on society. Even if in an individual case a family did not send one of its
members to the monastic life or change its sexual habits suffi ciently sharply to
reduce the level of procreation, it probably did, if it was rich enough, make gifts