Gloranthan Pregnancy

From: John Hughes (
Date: Sun 16 Apr 2000 - 01:44:07 EEST

This is a resend after my original disappeared into the predark. I have made
the customary propitiatory sacrifices to Porchango, who is doubtless feeling
disgruntled in the wake of the NASDEC crash. Apologies if my sub-caffeine
babbling suddenly pops up in duplicate.

Alex and Joerg - thanks for your thoughtful responses on death, hell and
heroquesting. And Joerg, those *technical* bits on archery were brillig!

Original post -

Heys Folks,

So Gian, how was Damascus? :)


Roger McCarthy:
> (BTW how long do pregnancies last in Glorantha - 4 seasons would be about
> right assuming that Gloranthan days are about 20% longer than earth days
> so
> the birth would be somewhere between Fire season 1604 and Fire/1605).

As Alex noted, there has been ongoing inconsistency on this, and
reflecting as it does on the basic forms of Gloranthan time and space, its
about time it got finally sorted.

I asked Greg about it directly a few weeks ago, and his response then was

>9/12 OF A [Gloranthan] YEAR.

That is, in direct ratio to human pregnancy (in months) against the terran
year. I've refined that to 294/365 when calculating human and domestic
 animal pregnancies. [Ratio of Gloranthan days in a year to earthly days in
year]. Using that equation, Gloranthan human pregnancy is 280*294/365 = 225,
which I'd shorten to 224 days or 4 seasons, giving the same day and week to
both conception and birth, (barring Sacred Time complications ).

Estrus cycles, however, I would keep as the equivalent number of days as on

Hopefully some sort of unequivocal answer will feature in the Orlanthi life
section of Thunder Rebels, though as yet I make no promises or predictions.

On earth, animal fertility cycles have evolved around the cycles of the
seasons, with mating, pregnancy and birth occurring at the most
environmentally opportune times. Because of this, I think there is a lot of

work still to be done in understanding Gloranthan animal life-cycles, rather
than relying too heavily on direct mathematical correspondences. Is this
John making yet *another* plea to take everyday animal life and non-terran
seasonal progressions more seriously? I'm afraid it is. <g>.


 _____________________________________________ John Hughes

Language is like a cracked kettle on which we beat out tunes
for bears to dance to, while all the time we long to move the stars
to pity.

- -Flaubert, 'Madam Bovary'.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 21:17:29 EEST