Ancient Egyptian Surgery, by Alina Edwards. Published 2016.

Although sometimes overlooked, surgery is a fundamental part of the scientific and medical fields that dominate our world today. By exploring the different areas of the human body, while also healing others, surgeons give us a clear understanding of the functions of our bodily systems. The people of the ancient world- especially the Egyptians- had a vague insight into surgical procedures, and yet performed them in a usually successful way. The ancient Egyptian culture was regulated by religious views, which is why many of the practices were interconnected with deities or other religious outlets, but still there were scientifically charged means of surgery among the Egyptian surgeons. The different aspects of ancient Egyptian surgery, including invasive and noninvasive surgery and clinical treatments given to patients, were all influential for the promotion of scientific knowledge in Egypt.

Invasive surgery, defined as the insertion of medical devices into the body after making an incision, was rarely practiced in ancient Egypt, but there are a few procedures which should be noted when discussing Egyptian medicine. One of the procedures practiced was circumcision of males, and possibly females, which includes the removal of genitalia. Analyzing the societal aspects of circumcision, Megahed explains how “the reliefs and statues showing both noble and lower classes of the society circumcised… indicate that circumcision was generally practiced among the Egyptian population…” (156-157). Circumcision in ancient Egypt is usually described as a successful process, even by the famous Greek historian Herodotus. The fact that a large factor of the Egyptian population took part in the procedure signify that the surgeons were capable and trusted by the people, despite it being a rather risky operation. Another invasive practice was tracheostomy, one that is still in use today. Blomstedt maintains that we owe this development to the ancient Egyptians: “Tracheostomy is a procedure often said to have been invented and performed by the ancient Egyptians…” (666). This operation is quite complex and can save people’s lives if performed properly, so the fact that the Egyptians are credited with its invention is quite important for their medical reputation and conveys how complex their methodical approaches to surgery were. Lastly, the procedure trephination is famously dangerous to all patients, as it involves digging a needle (or other sharp devices) into the skull, without anaesthesia. Sullivan argues that the Egyptians’ lack of trephination indicated their advancement in medicine: “The lack of this procedure [trephination] in ancient Egypt may indeed reflect the high medical skill of the surgeons… The surgeon would have recognized the exceptionally high morbidity and mortality associated with trephination” (471). The Egyptians’ knowledge of anatomy and function most likely dissuaded them from completing this practice, as it would have been highly dangerous to the patient. These procedures (and the lack thereof) of circumcision, tracheostomy and trephination convey to Egyptologists how knowledgeable the ancient Egyptian surgeons were about human anatomy and conditions- enough to insert medical instruments into the body.

Ancient Egyptian surgeons performed noninvasive surgical procedures more often than invasive ones, such as prosthetics, dentistry and bone repair; these cases were varied in frequency, but there is evidence of their success among ancient Egyptian physicians. Prosthetics are said to have been used in ancient Egypt, during life. Recounting the evidence of prosthesis in Egypt, Finch explains that “…mortuary texts written on papyrus… The two artificial toes described here are far more sophisticated in both design and appearance than any of these embalmers’ restorations” (548). Here, Finch notes that the toe prosthetics archaeologists have found evidence of is ‘sophisticated’ in its construction, demonstrating the success of prosthetics in  Egypt. Another important noninvasive field was dentistry. Attia describes the evidence researchers have of dental treatments, saying that “the earliest evidence of ancient dentistry is found in numerous papyri containing several prescriptions to dental diseases, such as pyorrhea…” (76). Again, the reader understands that Egyptian dentistry was noninvasive, but nevertheless essential for the cures of dental diseases, which were common in ancient times. Finally there was bone treatment, which was quite varied in its methods and still successful. According to Salib, there are many comparisons one can make between ancient Egyptian and modern bone and splint treatment, most of which are a positive outlook on Egyptian bone repair: “In contrast to present-day experience there was a striking absence of fracture-dislocation of the ankle… In contrast to modern practice, more than two splints were used to form a protective casing. Many types of splint were used: the mid-rib of the date-palm leaf… or bundles of straw from coarse grass.” (945) The wide variety in treatments implies a vast knowledge of medicine, and the lack of incidents common today shows a responsible and mature surgeon population.

Many of the ancient medical papyri, including the Edwin Smith, Ebers and Kahun, were advanced in their organization and classifications, which further demonstrates the skill of the surgeons. The Edwin Smith papyrus is perhaps the most famous of these surgical documents, as it entails several different procedures that give Egyptologists a clear picture of ancient Egyptian surgery. Along with many other historians, Atta argues that this papyrus is one of the most important in medical history: “The scientific methodology, systematic organization, and rationale the ancient Egyptian surgeon followed in this treatise are remarkable and unprecedented. Many scientific facts have been mentioned in this papyrus for the first time in human history” (1190). Not only was the organization of the papyrus exceptional, but as was the case studies themselves and the information one can learn from them. Another famous surgical treatise was the Ebers papyrus, which included many distinctive case studies ranging from cancer to birth control. Von Klein gives a short review of the papyrus: “A large proportion of the diseases known to modern medical science are carefully classified and their symptoms minutely described… Medicines are directed to be administered internally in the form of decoctions, infusions, injections, pills, tablets…” (11). As the reader can see, there were numerous options for treatment, suggesting the Egyptians’ high medical status and scope of knowledge; Von Klein also says that the cases were ‘carefully classified,’ connecting back to the methodical organization of the Edwin Smith Papyrus, as they were both said to be well-organized. Lastly, there was the Kahun Gynecological Papyrus, which dealt chiefly with women’s health. Smith describes the contents of the papyrus, as well as the importance: “The suggested treatments are varied and interesting, and include… medicines introduced into the body in the form of pessaries or as a liquid to be drunk or rubbed onto the skin. …” (54). Again, the medical approaches used by the Egyptians were diverse and particular, and one can make the st conclusion that ancient gynecologists would have to have been quite skilled to insert pessaries into a woman’s body. These medical papyri are all informative on the level of skill of the ancient Egyptian doctors.

The various clinical and hands-on treatments used by the ancient Egyptian surgeons, and the procedures that involved these treatments, were methodical and took into account the benefit for the patient. One of the tools used as treatment were the tools of the embalming process, a procedure which is widely known to ancient Egypt. Herodotus, an ancient Greek historian, gives an account of the step-by-step process: “They take first a crooked piece of iron, and with it draw out the brain through the nostrils… Next they make a cut along the flank with a sharp Ethiopian stone, and take out the whole contents of the abdomen… After this they fill the cavity with the purest bruised myrrh… and sew up the opening.” (par. 1) Herodotus’s detailed summary conveys a standardized and logical mummification process, and an efficient use of not only medical equipment, but also natural resources, such as myrrh. Another clinical treatment was the use of the knife treatment, which is perhaps the most well-known in ancient Egyptian surgery. Nunn describes a phrase from one of the medical papyri, concerning the knife treatment: “This [the knife treatment] was a very common phrase in the medical papyri… It is recommended that the knife be heated… before using the knife treatment- then ‘the bleeding is not great.’” (167) Here, the reader definitely sees the attentive care that was put into the treatment, as the surgeon notes how to handle the knife. Finally, there was bone and splint treatment, which, Forrest explains, the ancient Egyptians were altogether advanced in: “The Egyptians appear to have learned that a closed wound heals faster than an open one. They invented the adhesive bandage by applying gum to linen strips and using these to draw wound edges together.” (200) This field of surgery seems to have been one the Egyptians excelled at- as Forrest notes, they invented a protective cast people constantly use today, which tells researchers a lot about their medical knowledge. The different solutions to a patient’s illness or pain conveys the advanced skills of many Egyptian physicians and surgeons, through the recommendation of better treatments for the patient’s safety.

In conclusion, the different procedures and methods of surgery in ancient Egypt are important for historians to understand the extent of scientific knowledge during the time. Egyptologists can see from the advanced organization in the medical papyri that their methods were developed and far from primitive, as some may believe. In terms of procedures, the invasive and noninvasive practices emphasize the skills of the surgeons, as these practices were common enough to have been usually successful. Understanding the systems and science behind ancient Egyptian surgery allows researchers to see the competence of the doctors and how their fields were advantageous for scientific knowledge.