Julius Caesar Research Paper

Introduction

There is no clear origin for the name caesarean. The most accepted is the Roman law Lex Caesarea which stated that in the event of the death of the mother during labour the foetus should be removed to be buried separately.1 James Guillimeau, a 16th century surgeon, argued the name derived from the birth of the roman emperor Julius Caesar who was “ripped out of his mother’s wombe”.2 This is debatable as Caesar’s mother, Aurelia, survived into her son’s adult life which would have been extremely unlikely after a caesarean in Ancient Rome.1

Ancient caesareans

Accounts exist of caesareans taking place throughout ancient history. The gods of medicine and wine, Aesculapius and Bacchus, may have been caesarean births.3 In Babylon in

In 1817 Princess Charlotte and her child died when the obstetrician, Sir Richard Croft, refused to perform a caesarean during her long obstructed labour.2 By 1879 caesareans were more routine; a British physician, R.W.Felkin, documented a caesarean performed by a Banyoro doctor in Uganda in which both mother and child were healthy eleven days afterwards.5

Towards the 1850s caesareans started to be used if the pelvis was contracted below 3½ inches. Above this, three other methods were used: forceps, craniotomy and induction.5 Craniotomy had a lower maternal mortality rate, so was usually favoured over caesareans. Caesareans also carried major risks of infection and haemorrhaging, giving a high maternal mortality rate.7 A study in Copenhagen revealed that out of 388 operations reported from 1750 to 1839, the survival rate was 38%.2

In the 19th century several breakthroughs lead to improved maternal survival rates. In 1847 anaesthesia was introduced. Despite the religious view that women should suffer during pregnancy anaesthesia was a turning point in caesarean history, principally because it gave the surgeon more time while operating on a still patient. Queen Victoria gave birth to two of her children under chloroform spiking demand for obstetric

Baskett T, Calder A, Arulkumaran S. Chapter 11: Caesarean section. Thomas Basket. In: Munro Kerr’s Operative Obstetrics, 11e. Philadelphia. Saunders Elsevier. 2007: 151-166

4. Lurie S. The changing motives of caesarean section: from the ancient world to the twenty-first century. Archives of Gynecology Obstetrics. 2005. 271: 281–285

5. Lurie S, Glezerman M. The history of caesarean technique. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2003. 189: 1803–1806

6. Churchill H. Chapter 3: Caesareans in the nineteenth century. In: Caesarean Birth: Experience, Practice and History, 1e. Manchester, Books for Midwives Press: 1997: 32-39

7. Low J. Caesarean Section—Past and Present. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. 2009. 12:1131-6.

8. Sewell J. In: Caesarean Section - a Brief History. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists. 1993

9. Francome C, Savage W, Chruchill H, Lewison H. Chapter 3: Caesreans in the twentieth century. Book Production Consultants. In: Caesarean Birth in Britain. London, Middlesex University Press. 1993: 36-44.

10. Churchill H. Chapter 6: The Development of Operative Technique. In: Caesarean Birth: Experience, Practice and History, 1e. Manchester, Books for Midwives Press: 1997: