On the duration of pregnancy and the calculation of the date of confinement : is Dr. Wm. Harvey or Dr. Wm. Montgomery in the right? / by J. Matthews Duncan.

  • Duncan, J. Matthews (James Matthews), 1826-1890.
Date:
[1856]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the duration of pregnancy and the calculation of the date of confinement : is Dr. Wm. Harvey or Dr. Wm. Montgomery in the right? / by J. Matthews Duncan. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    2/6 (page 2)
    i Beatty, Skey, M^Ilwairi, Asliwell, Cederschjold, and others, in which the date of impregnation appeared to he fixed by a single coitus. From this table it is found that the average interval between insemination and parturition (commonly called the duration of pregnancy) is 276'93 days. Dr Veit also collected a mass of observations in regard to the interval between the end of menstruation and parturition. From this collection, he ascertained that the average extent of this period is 2785 days. These conclusions, although widely published in this and other countries, have been subjected to nothing that could be called adverse criticism, till the recent republicatioii of Dr Montgomery’s great work on the signs and symptoms of pregnancy. This con¬ tains an essay on the period of Human Gestation, in which it is assumed, we shall see on wdiat authority, that the natural period of gestation is forty weeks or 280 days; and in wdiich the followdng statement of the immortal Harvey is pronounced to be erroneous. We quote from Montgomery. The words of this illustrious man are these—^ Unquestionably^ the ordinary term of utero-gestation is that^ which we believe was kept, in the womb of his mother^ by our Saviour Chris^ of men the most perfect; counting^ viz.^ from the festival of the Annunciation, in the month of Alarchj to the day of the blessed Nativity, which we celebrate in December.^ This is a period of 275 days only: he then goes on to state, what does not appear to have any very obvious connexion wuth the fact referred to, but is indeed rather at variance wdth it.” u i matrons^ he says, ^ calculating after this rule, as long as they note the day of the month in which the catamenia usually appear, are rarely out of their reckoning; but, after ten lunar months have elaq)sed, fall into labour, and reap the fruit of their womb, the very day on ivliich the catamenia would have appeared had impregnation 7iot taken placed ” iviy object in the present article is, briefly, to defend the opinion of Harvey, to re-affirm my conclusions of 1854, on the ground of the data afforded by Dr Montgomery, and to show that his assumption of 280 days, as the natural period of human gestation is, to say the least, unfounded. The Duration of Pregnancy. The period generally recognized under this name, and discussed by Dr Montgomery, does not measure the real duration, which ex¬ tends from conception to parturition, but that other period extending from fruitful connexion to parturition. It is this latter of which we now discourse. Dr Montgomery describes the natural period of human gestation as 280 days. Now', there is no such thing knowm to obstetricians to exist in nature, as a natural period of pregnancy, measuring a certain number of days. This interval betw^een fruitful coitus and I