Dating from the seventeenth century b.c. the Edwin Smith papyrus is a unique treatise containing the oldest known descriptions of signs and symptoms of injuries of the spinal column and spinal cord. Based on a recent “medically based translation” of the Smith papyrus, its enclosed treasures in diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic reasoning are revisited. Although patient demographics, diagnostic techniques and therapeutic options considerably changed over time, the documented rationale on spinal injuries can still be regarded as the state-of-the-art reasoning for modern clinical practice.

✓The Edwin Smith Papyrus (circa 1650–1550 BC) is a didactic trauma treatise of major interest to neurosurgery, as it deals primarily with cranial and spine injuries. Information regarding the patient's condition is conveyed in the papyrus with sufficient clarity to allow a clinical assessment of each injury. The ancient Egyptian physician/teacher lists the key diagnostic elements in each case, and then pronounces his opinion of the treatment potential in one of three verdicts: 1) “a medical condition I can treat;” 2) “a medical condition I can contend with;” or 3) “a medical condition you will not be able to treat.” The structural organization of the text according to regional injuries of increasing severity permits analysis of sequential cases, and makes it possible to determine which clinical features led the ancient Egyptian physician to give the first or second verdict in the less severe injuries, but the third in the worst cases. Interestingly, the ancient physicians were not deterred from contending with injuries in the presence of basilar skull fractures, traumatic meningismus, skull perforation without overt neurological deficit, drowsiness, limited facial fractures, or closed head injuries without depressed fragments. Factors identified as determinant for the third verdict in head injuries are depressed skull fragments, dura laceration with exposed brain, infected cranial wounds/tetanus, major craniofacial fractures, deep skull–penetrating stab wounds, and aphasia. This study describes three case sequences of head injuries.

This article analyzes the head injury of Emperor Moctezuma as one of those injuries that affected the course of history. The Emperor’s death arguably changed the fate of an entire nation and led to the destruction of the Aztec civilization. Moctezuma died in the evening hours of June 30, 1520, in his palace in the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan, while a prisoner of the Spanish conquistadors. The Emperor had been speaking to his people in an effort to persuade them to cease hostilities against Hernán Cortés, his Spanish soldiers, and Indian allies. Both Spanish and Indian contemporary sources document that he sustained a severe head injury when one of his own warriors hit him with a rock thrown from a sling. However, after the Conquest of Mexico some of the information collected by Spanish friars from Indian stories, songs, and pictorial representations raised the possibility that Moctezuma died of strangulation or stabbing at the hands of the Spaniards. There is even a suggestion of suicide. This issue remains unresolved and emotionally charged. The historical and clinical analysis of the events surrounding Moctezuma’s death indicates that the Emperor most likely died as a consequence of head injury. The author has attempted to present a neutral analysis but agrees with Benjamin Keen that neutrality may be unattainable, no matter how remote the subject of historical inquiry is from the present.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.