Was there Poliomyelitis in Ancient Egypt, and if so, why?

If you research the history of poliomyelitis, you will invariably come across some text like this from History of Polio from the Polio Global Eradication Initiative:

“An Egyptian stele portrays a priest with a withered leg, suggesting that polio has existed for thousands of years.”

This is a screenshot of the timeline of poliomyelis from the Polio Global Eradication Initiative. Their timeline jumps from 1580-1350 BC to 1789. Based on my review of literature thus far, there is a great deal of information that the Polio Global Eradication Initiative could have included between these two dates. These events however are generally described as paralysis due to ingestion of neurotoxins, especially arsenic. I suppose that’s the reason they jumped over 3,000 years in their timeline.

Here’s a better look at the Egyptian stele:

A paper in Springer Nature says: “The ca. 1500 BCE stele of a priest called Ruma with a shorter leg and helping himself with a stick (Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Museum ÆIN 0134) is considered to be one of the first representations of a polio victim [2].”

Assuming this stele does represent a case of poliomyelitis, which is not at all certain, in this article I will present an alternative theory to the cause of poliomyelitis other than a “virus.” The research I’m about to present isn’t definitive, but it makes a great deal more sense than a “virus” does.

In 1882, Seguin definitively described how lead and arsenic caused poliomyetis. Seguin reported studies where animals were given arsenic. Autopsies were performed on the animals afterwards which showed the poliomyelitis in various stages.

I’m interested in the metallurugy of Ancient Egypt. Take a look at this stele again. The priest is holding two items. In the right hand, he appears to hold a wine goblet. In the left, there appears to be a scythe. What are the metallurgical compositions of these items?

The use of arsenic was common in Ancient Egypt. Arsenic was used to alloy copper, known as arsenic bronze.

HISTORY OF APPLIED SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CHAPTER 3 – ANCIENT EGYPTIAN METALLURGY. MARTIN ODLER

Many popular works state that early Egyptians, including the Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom pyramid builders, used only tools made of pure copper, but that is not true: they were using arsenic copper as the main practical alloy, which was typical for the whole ancient Near East in the Early Bronze Age. Sometimes arsenic and copper occur naturally together in one ore but in other cases they were mixed intentionally. The addition of arsenic to copper causes the resulting alloy to be harder and gives it properties similar to those of tin bronze, such as hardness and ductility.[5]

Odler referenced the following article which described mechanical tests of copper-arsenic alloys compared to copper-tin.

Arsenic Bronze: Dirty Copper or Chosen Alloy? A View from the Americas Heather Lechtman, Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Winter, 1996), pp. 477-514 (38 pages). Published By: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Archaeologists and historians of metallurgy have attempted to explain the gradual abandonment of arsenic bronze in favor of tin bronze in the ancient Old World by making comparisons between the mechanical properties of the two bronzes. These comparisons purport to show the superiority of copper-tin alloys over alloys of copper and arsenic, despite an absence of data on the physical properties of the copper-arsenic system. The study reported here presents the results of mechanical tests carried out on experimental samples of both types of bronze over a broad range of alloy compositions. Hardness, tensile strength, and elongation determinations were made on cold worked and hot worked (forged) material. Whereas tin bronzes can be work hardened more extensively than arsenic bronzes, the far greater ductility of arsenic bronze makes it a desirable alloy for the manufacture of thin metal sheet. The widespread use of low-arsenic copper-arsenic alloys in the Americas, especially in the Andean culture area, is attributable in part to the tradition there of sheet metal production in the elaboration of three-dimensional forms.

Budd said copper-arsenic was one of the oldest metal alloys. Arsenic is a metal of course.

Recasting the Bronze Age By Paul Budd 23 October 1993

Until recently most archaeologists assumed that arsenical coppers were the first intentionally produced alloys. Various arguments were put forward in favour of this idea, stressing the advantages of arsenical copper over pure copper as a material for making tools and weapons. The arguments were based on some well-known facts about arsenic. For example, it could act as a deoxidant in casting, preventing the metal becoming too brittle, and it increased the hardness of edges formed on tools and weapons by hammering.

I looked at some message board posts of blacksmiths and the like about working with copper arsenate. They said it was a lost art, and that it was virtually illegal to buy arsenic anymore. But some had made copper arsenate alloys. They said of course that arsenic was extremely toxic and that if you did work with it you had to have great ventilation and PPE and yada yada. The fumes of arsenic in the alloying process have to be avoided. Another article referenced that the hotter the temperature of copper was before the addition of arsenic, the greater the percentage of arsenic that would alloy with copper.

And that got me thinking. At first when I thought about the stele, I thought that the priest must have consumed arsenic from the goblet, or that like many people in that era, he had been exposed to it from copper arsenic tools. But it seemed like if that were the case, there would have been much more reported information about poliomyelitis in Ancient Egypt other than a few cases like the priest. Many people would have been using these tools and goblets containing arsenic.

Below: A stele depicting Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten (r. 1353-1336 BCE) and his family worshipping the Aten or sun disk.

So then I thought, maybe the priests of Egypt were the metallurgists of their day? Sure enough:

“This paper argues that alchemy originated in the Egyptian priesthood among temple metallurgists who were responsible for making cultural objects.”

Secrets of the God Makers: Re-Thinking the Origins of Greco-Egyptian Alchemy

And I think that’s the answer. The priests were working with metals and inhaling fumes.

Charles Wright