الطب المصري القديم

by John F. Nunn, عمرو شريف (Translator), عادل وديع فلسطين (Translator)

The skills of the ancient Egyptians in preserving bodies through mummification are well known, but their expertise in the everyday medical practices needed to treat the living is less familiar and often misinterpreted. John F. Nunn draws on his own experience as an eminent doctor of medicine and an Egyptologist to reassess the evidence. He has translated and reviewed the original Egyptian medical papyri and has reconsidered other sources of information, including skeletons, mummies, statues, tomb paintings and coffins.Illustrations highlight similarities in the conditions of ancient and modern patients. Nunn appraises the criteria by which the ancient Egyptian doctors made their diagnoses in the context of current medical knowledge, showing that many of their findings are still valid today. Nunn also explores ancient Egyptian spells and incantations and the relationship of magic and religion to medical practices.Incorporating the most recent insights of modern medicine and Egyptology, Nunn furnishes the reader with a comprehensive and authoritative book on a fascinating subject.

Genres: Egypt, History, Egyptology, Nonfiction, Ancient History

419 pages, Paperback

First published February 1, 1996

Reviews

[Tharwat · Rating 5 out of 5]

يعد مرجعًا هامًا للغاية في الربط بين الطب والحضارة المصرية القديمة، هو عمدة في بابه، كنت أحتاج لقرائته لمجال عملي ودراستي في الآثار، لغير المتخصصين سيكون مملًا وصعب القراءة، بالنسبة لي كانت كل فقرة بمثابة تأشير لما تحتويه من معان وسعت مجال إدراكي لطبيعة الطب المصري القديم، وساعد على ذلك خبرة الكاتب الواسعة بالطب من ناحية وباللغة المصرية القديمة من ناحية، قد تشتروه ولكن ستضعوه في المكتبة إلى جانب كثير من الدراسات المتخصصة التي لا تستطيعون إكمال قرائتها.. هذا من باب العلم.

[James F · Rating 3 out of 5]

Discusses all aspects of ancient Egyptian medicine, from the evidence of the actual remains, the medical papyri, and other literature and art of the period.

[Isaac · Rating 3 out of 5]

this was an enjoyable academic book, I feel that the editor didn't look at it closely as there are some sections where where the author slips into first person personal opinion for no other reason than he feels that's correct, and that those sections were just missed in the editing process