Back in November, I wrote a post (entitled Join the anti-anti-family family!) in which I cited the Roman definition of family as including "all members of a household: relatives, non-relatives, servants, slaves, and other employees."

While it's nothing new, this has been confirmed again by what has been described as a "landmark analysis" based on thousands of inscriptions on Roman tombstones:

Analysis of Roman epitaphs alters concept of 'family'

February 11, 2004

If ancient Romans observed Family Day, their celebrations would have included wet nurses, slaves and possibly many others who had no blood relationship, according to new University of Calgary research.

nielsenA landmark analysis by classicist Dr. Hanne Sigismund Nielsen of more than 4,500 inscriptions on Roman tombstones shows that our concept of the Roman family needs to be broadened to include much more than just parents, grandparents and children.

"Roman families did not at all look like our family structure today," says Nielsen, who spent more than 10 years examining the Latin inscriptions. "Quite a few family relationships existed by choice and were not at all contained in the biological family." For example, slaves were often related to their masters by choice, families frequently included foster parents or children, and wet nurses were especially honoured. (HT Justin Case, who I might start calling "Justine" if he doesn't start posting something!)

Roman families included, but were not limited to, people related by marriage.

Language itself is often redefined by activists for political purposes.

At least no one is trying to redefine "family" in the Constitution!

(That would really be THE END.)