Palla Ákos szerk.: Az Országos Orvostörténeti Könyvtár közleményei 10-11. (Budapest, 1958)

the latter is rather frequent with mummies embalmed during the Roman period of Egypt. In both our cases the bone erges around the foramen occipitale magnum have been broken to facilitate the lifting out of the brain. With the transnasal method, access into the Skull was effected through the ethmoid cells, which tallies with the information of Herodotos and the results of Ruffer's examinations. The author, however, has observed in the mummies he examined that during embalming the frontal and maxillar nasal cavities were opened in several cases, in fact, even tlhe sphenoidal sinus was opened in 5 cases. Grapow has proved in a convincing manner, that the nasal sinuses were unknown to the physicians of ancient Egypt, and that the „geheime Kammer der Nase" (Síj. t. nt. fnh) meant the inside of the nose. This is integrally accepted by the author. The circumstance that the nasal civites were opened during embalming does not permit to draw ccncdusions on the medical knowledge of the Egyptians. He deems, however, worth while to draw attention to his above mentioned findings. Comper-'sons would be interesting, with the i a d t. disease, which, according to Grapow, might be identical with plague. Egyptians imputed this illness to the demon under the rule of Sachmet goddess of war. According to the inscription of the Nergal temple in Kutha (the poem entitled "The King of Rutha"), the epidemy is similarly caused by the legion of spirits (spirits of the dead?) of Irra, demon of plauge commanded by the wargod Nergal. Thus, the demons of plauge are under the command of the wargod both in the ancient Egyptian and in the Mesopotamian text. Empirical and magical elements connected with old Egyptian therapeutics are dealt with dn detail, and tlhe author compares them from this angle with Babylonian and Old Persian therapeutics. In the opinion of the author, Egyptian therapeutics — in a similitude to the general history of therapeutics — took their origin in experience while magic influence dates from a later period. Hence, however attractive the opinion of the otherwise worthy Siegerist, the author sees no sufficient reason for altering the opinion formed cm the primacy of empirical therapy. Other statements of Siegerist's excellent brooks are fully accepted by the author. We believe it to be proved that in Egypt therapeutics took their origin in experience, since paleopathological examinations of finds (e. g. splinted fractures) earlier than the texts of pyramids advanced as arguments by Siegerist speak for the primacy of empiricism. The first primitive interpretations of diseases had their origin in a