Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-01 > 1073459659

From: (Douglas Richardson)
Subject: Re: Britain's Real Monarch
Date: 6 Jan 2004 23:14:19 -0800
References: <bs3o3d$km2$> <bt7c7s$hig$> <bt8q1q$lvs$> <bt8v5n$duo$> <bt99n7$k77$> <bt9edc$nue$> <bt9fkh$q06$> <btfd8p$v1h$> <xUGKb.771$> <btferl$d2i$>

"Chris Phillips" <> wrote in message news:<btferl$d2i$>...
> D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> > Why does something so incredibly flakey as this bollixed charge that
> > Edward IV was illegitimate even initiate a drunken pub discussion in
> > Britain ---- much less a pseudo-respectable television program?
> >
> > Are there that many people in Britain who so hate the Royals that they
> > will watch this crap and then discuss it seriously?
> Although I'm sceptical about the claim that Edward IV was the product of an
> adulterous liaison, I think it would be wrong to characterise it as
> "flakey", "bollixed" or "crap".
> Dr Jones has certainly brought to light interesting evidence from the Rouen
> register, which increases our knowledge of 15th-century history. The
> evidence bearing on Edward's birth deserves to be weighed carefully.
> Chris Phillips

Dear Chris ~

A pregnancy generally lasts 10 lunar months, or 280 days, or 40 weeks.
The counting of the length of pregnancy starts from the first day of
a woman's last menstrual period (LMP). Then you add 280 days.

In reality, a woman can deliver a baby two weeks early or two weeks
late and it still be considered a full term delivery. All six of my
children, for example, were born ten days past their expected date.
They were considered full term.

So, full term would be 280 days from LMP, plus or minus a couple of
weeks. Anything earlier than 37 weeks is considered premature birth.

For further particulars, see the following website:

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah


This thread: