It says in your description of the druids and such they were capable of brain surgery. Now how is that possible?
Printable View
It says in your description of the druids and such they were capable of brain surgery. Now how is that possible?
not brain surgery in the modern sense, but people have been cutting holes in skulls to relieve swelling/pressure since the stone ageQuote:
Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards
Or to let demons out. :laugh4:
Now, a better question is, does the patient still function after the procedure?
Tidus Pullo did after his little... encounter with a brain surgeon....
(Rome)
There is a guy in Africa today (well, he was alive a decade ago) that has had multiple cranal surguries by a shaman. He suffers from reoccuring headaches and was diagonosed with demons living in his head. He has had so many holes drilled in his head that he has to wear a hat at all times since he basically has no top of his skull. Since the brain was unharmed and the skin healed over the wound, he is completely unchanged.
Surgery like Titus Pullo's would have probably resulted in some sort of decreased mental capacities depending on how deep the pot fragment was and where it was. Though there is a 99% chance he would have died of infection. Though surgery like that of HBO's Rome actually did happen (though 50-200 years later). And it was reported as successfully working.
All things considered, brain surgery (especially if it was only drilling in the skull to release pressure) is entirely possible, if the patient doesn't die of infection.
Infection appears to have been one if not THE main factor to reasons of death after injury or surgery.
It's possible, theres examples off extremely ancient brain surgery. There are examples of successful brain surgery in the Neolithic period France. I don't see why a more developed Iron age civilization couldn't also be capable of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards
Trephination was and is practiced in many cultures all over the world. The oldest example for a survived operation is a skull from ca. 5000 BC. Trephination with ancient techniques is practiced even today in some parts of the world. The picture shows an example such simple "brain surgery" in the 20th century, somewhere in Africa, I think it was Somalia.
https://img63.imageshack.us/img63/73/trep14ae.th.jpg
Tools to open skulls from a roman grave:
https://img63.imageshack.us/img63/3394/trep21wt.th.jpg
See also here:
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci...%20Surgery.htm
Infection and massive hemoraging are the main dangers, I am personnally convinced the Greeks and Romans used wine or vinega as an antiseptic, otherwise I don't see how doctors could have been so knife happy.
Honey is another possibility, it was used as an antiseptic in the Middle Ages, famously on Henry V's face.
so was wine a good disinfectant? or was the alcohol concentration not high enough? I'm not much of an expert on disinfectants...Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
It's better than nothing, put it that way. Ancient wine was very strong, and generally drunk mixed with water, I would think that applied directly to a wound shortly after injury it would give you a pretty good chance of not getting seriously infected.
I wouldn't be surprised if concentrated urea was used, which could be obtained from evaporated urine. It had been used in the cleaning of fabrics and was known to clean other things - though the specifics killing of microorganisms wasn't.
Upper class members would also use evaporated urine to clean their teeth. I think it was Catullus who wrote a poem about how, despite how clean this guy's teeth was, it didn't matter because everyone knew he just drank more piss than anyone else. :laugh4:
The Romans had a great sense of humor.
what makes ancient wine stronger then today's wine? I'm not yet of legal drinking age (21) so i don't know much about Wine
They didn't reduce the yeast to limit the amount of alcohol produced in fermentation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MastaSpoofa
I'm not of legal drinking age either, but I can tell you that the best way to see this for yourself is to compare homemade wine and vinyard wine. Pretty noticeable difference.
Fermentation cannot produce anything with a alcohol level higher than 12-15%. It is a biological impossiblity. Alcohol producing life forms (yeast) will actually die from alcohol levels from 12-15%. Ancient wine was probably just that though, 15%.
Wine can reach 18-20%, plus it's possible to make much stronger stuff by leaving stuff to ferment in a container (people makes at home stuff that can reach 80%, even though the average is around 40-50%, just have a trip in european countrysides and you will see)...
To reach higher percentages of alcohol, you must distill it after the process of fermentation. By distilling a liquor, you can reach levels approaching 100% alcohol level. The fermentation process can only make it reach levels of 12-15%, though. Distillation kills much of the quality of a fermented alcohol. If a wine is distilled, it is no longer 'wine'.
Today there have been bred new types of yeast that can survive higher levels of alcohol concentration. One company brags that they have a yeast that won't die until about the 30% level.
I can assure you that some wines can reach 18% without using any special yeast (talking about stuff made the same way since centuries ago, my family makes wine and other liquors at home so I have some knowledge about the process), which in any case would be used only on industrial scale production and not on the artisanal/home ones, where all is left to what's in the air (aka, no yeast added as the one present in the air is enough).
About distillation, I wouldn't be surprised if celtic druids made "magic" potions that way, couple shots of that stuff can make a person not used to it do all sorts of crazy things plus alcohol intoxication increases aggressiveness.
I made mention of this in an old thread.
See Doctors section
my2bob