C-section: Questions and potential complications...

This question isn't strictly about medicine—it’s more of a historical inquiry, though I suspect the medical professionals in this group might actually be the best ones to weigh in on this particular matter...
So... when did the C-section actually make its debut in history? Was it practiced by ancient civilizations long before modern times? For instance, would the people of Egypt have had the knowledge to perform such a procedure?
And further, was anyone living 2,000 years ago—back during Jesus' era—truly skilled and capable enough to successfully carry out a C-section?

Does anyone know if there is any concrete evidence or historical documentation regarding this?

Kate Cox2 said:this isn't really a medical question so much as a history one, though I guess doctors would be the ones to know best...
so... when did C-sections actually start (historically speaking), and were they performed in ancient cultures? For instance, did the Egyptians know how to pull this off?
And was anyone even smart or skilled enough to perform a C-section 2,000 years ago (back in Jesus' time)?

is there any actual evidence or written records about this?

Supposedly Caesar himself was born that way, though honestly, that sounds pretty hard to believe.

James Watson84 said:Apparently, Caesar was just born that way, though I find that incredibly hard to swallow.

Why? Look, they’ve found mummies in Egypt where CT scans show clear evidence of cranial surgery—actual traces on the skull suggesting they performed open-brain procedures, and the patients actually survived and lived for quite a while afterward. It’s a reminder that ancient civilizations were far more sophisticated than we give them credit for today.

Not quite. That’s the common misconception, but it's just not how it worked. One theory is that the name actually comes from Caesar.
You can dig up all the other theories over on Wikipedia...😁
Basically, about 2,000 years ago—and even a bit after that 😁—babies were only delivered that way if the mother didn't make it through childbirth, so they'd try to save at least one child.
Caesar's mother lived for another 16 or 17 years, so there's no way she was born that way... 🙂

Angela Wright said:Why? I mean, they found mummies in Egypt where CT scans showed actual marks on the skull bones proving they performed open brain surgery—and the people actually survived and lived for quite a while after the procedure. Ancient civilizations were way smarter than we give them credit for today.

Look, trepanning is one thing, but an open uterus surgery is a whole different ballgame 😬. Nobody was surviving a C-section back then (for a million different reasons), which is why I find it hard to swallow that Caesar was born that way with his mother still breathing afterward. On the flip side, the history of trepanning—basically drilling holes in skulls for all sorts of ritualistic or medical reasons—goes all the way back to the Neolithic era, long before any "official" civilizations even started.

Ancient Egyptians practiced skull trepanation, and according to certain texts, even performed imperial incisions... if any of you have an Introduction to Medicine textbook handy, there should be a section on it... I can look up the exact details and methods if anyone is genuinely interested

"The origins of the term C-section (sectio caesarea) remain debated, with three main theories:
1. Legend suggests Julius Caesar was born via this method, leading the procedure to be named after him.
2. Some believe the name stems from Roman law (lex regia), which mandated the removal of a child from a deceased mother—a practice known as lex caesarea.
3. During the Middle Ages, the word 'caesarea' referred to cutting (from the Latin 'caedere'), making the term 'sectio caesarea' a mere tautology.
Found this in an OB/GYN textbook; feel free to pick whichever theory suits you best. 🙂

James Watson84 said:Look, trepanation is one thing, but performing open surgery on a uterus is an entirely different beast 😬. Nobody could survive a C-section back then—for a million different reasons—which is exactly why I find it hard to swallow the idea that Caesar was born that way with his mother still breathing afterward. On the flip side, the history of trepanation (drilling holes in skulls for all sorts of beliefs and medical reasons) stretches all the way back to the Neolithic era, long before any "civilized" societies existed.

Sure, drilling into a skull might not be the most complex procedure to execute, but you have to weigh the massive risk of infection once you've opened up someone's head. If they actually had the skill to suppress infections enough for people to live long lives after the fact, and if they were smart enough to realize that head trauma can cause hydrocephalus requiring drainage, then I am firmly convinced they knew exactly which artery to pinch to stop a woman from bleeding out, and exactly which herbs to brew or poultices to apply to prevent sepsis. It’s highly likely the village healers learned the ropes on livestock—making sure a cow didn't die since that was their primary wealth—and they probably used a few slaves as practice before they ever dared to touch a lady of high standing.

Angela Wright said:Maybe trepanning isn't actually that hard to pull off, but you've gotta consider the massive infection risk when you open up someone's skull. If they were skilled enough to keep people alive long after the procedure, and smart enough to realize head trauma can cause hydrocephalus that needs draining, then I’m betting they knew exactly which artery to pinch to stop a woman from bleeding out. They probably knew which herbs to brew or poultices to use to dodge sepsis. Most likely, some old-timers learned the ropes on livestock—trying not to let a cow die since that was basically their bank account—and maybe used a few slaves to practice before moving on to the nobility.

I've got one big issue with your logic here: the reasons people wanted trepanation back in the day (migraines, epilepsy, mental issues, mystical stuff, or even making love potions out of skull shavings in ancient Egypt) are light years away from modern medical indications. Also, do you have any idea when people actually figured out what an infection is or that germs exist? You should really look into when humans started studying anatomy without being terrified of divine punishment, or when we finally understood how the circulatory system actually works. Even a C-section isn't some trivial little procedure, even by today's standards. Let's not mistake "gut feelings" for actual arguments. There's plenty of medical history out there—from ancient China, Egypt, and Greece, all the way through the Golden Age of Arabic medicine—that tells a much more complex story. I'm not saying people weren't trying to help, but their logic and worldview were nowhere near where we are now.
On the flip side, it's true that a ton of skulls found at archaeological sites show signs of trepanation, and some even show bone healing, which proves they survived the surgery. I can only imagine what life was like for them afterward 🙂. Even today, people survive sometimes because of doctors, and sometimes despite them.

Donna Hayes12 said:"The origin of the term C-section (sectio caesarea) is pretty murky, and there are three main theories:
1. According to some unproven legend, Julius Caesar was actually born via this method, so the surgery was named after him.
2. Some believe it comes from Roman law (lex regia), which required extracting a child from a deceased mother—a procedure known as lex cesaria.
3. In the Middle Ages, the word 'caesarea' referred to cutting (from the Latin 'caedere'), and since 'sectio' also means cutting, the term 'sectio caesarea' is basically just a tautology.
This is straight out of an OBGYN textbook, so feel free to pick whichever theory sounds best to you.🙂

That’s just what Wikipedia says... in English...😁
Well, now we know where most internet articles get their info... hey, at least it's reliable, I guess...🙂

James Watson84 said:I’ve got one major problem with your logic: the reasons people underwent trepanation back in the day—things like migraines, epilepsy, or various mental health issues—are light-years away from the clinical medical indications we recognize in modern medicine today.

Probably, but they’ve pulled it off successfully before. As someone who isn't a medical expert—and more importantly, as someone who is usually the one lying in the hospital bed—that track record is the only thing that actually matters to me.

Second off, do you actually have any clue when people finally grasped the concept of infection or realized that infectious diseases actually have specific causes? You really ought to look into the history of when we started studying human anatomy without being terrified of divine retribution. Think about how long it took for us to truly understand what the circulatory system is for and how it actually functions. And for the record, performing a C-section isn't some trivial little procedure, even by today's medical standards.

I don't know the exact dates by heart, but look at it this way: the Jewish people managed to survive thousands of years of hardship largely because they actually followed Biblical principles. One of those laws required anyone who came into contact with someone else's blood to stay in quarantine for several weeks. Even the concept of Kosher food is deeply rooted in basic infection control. I’m not sure if they called it a streptococcus infection back then or if they viewed it as a punishment from God Elijah, but does the distinction even matter?

Let’s stop treating personal convictions like they're actual arguments. There is a massive body of medical records spanning all of human history—stretching from ancient China, Egypt, and Greece through the golden ages of Arabic medicine—that provides enough empirical evidence to actually draw meaningful conclusions.

I don't view my deepest convictions as mere arguments; they’re just the raw material used to fuel a thoughtful debate on a forum like this. To me, a truly "good argument" is nothing more than a legitimate scientific discourse backed by actual research—but let's be honest, we aren't exactly looking for peer-reviewed studies in this corner of the internet, are we?😉 I’m wide open to suggestions and any "deep-seated convictions" you all might have.🙂

Lately, I’ve been reading up on how C-sections used to be almost synonymous with losing a mother. Like, the first recorded instance where a woman actually survived a C-section happened way back in 1500 over in Switzerland, and get this—it was performed by someone who basically just did pig castration for a living. Even then, having the mom make it through was still such a huge outlier. It’s wild to think that even as late as 1880, about 80% of moms were dying after the procedure, whereas nowadays, that number has plummeted to just 0.04%.

My bad then. I honestly thought I was in a "debate" with some medical expert trying to push their own agenda, so I got a little carried away. Gotta admit, for someone who isn't a pro, you clearly know your stuff. Forgive me, I'm still finding my footing here.😬

Joshua Ortiz9 said:Historically, C-sections were almost always a death sentence for the mother. The first recorded instance where both the mother and child actually survived was back in Switzerland around the year 1500, and it was performed by someone who basically just did pig castration for a living. Even then, a mother surviving was a massive outlier. To give you an idea of the progress, back in 1880, about 80% of mothers died following the procedure. Today, that number has plummeted to just 0.04%.

Man, can you even fathom what that looked like in 1500🤮? With zero hygiene, it would have been a literal miracle if the woman made it through.

James Watson84 said:In that case, my bad. I mistakenly thought I was in a "debate" with some amateur medic trying to push a specific agenda, so I got a bit carried away. I have to admit, for someone who isn't a professional, you actually know a lot about this stuff. Forgive me, I'm still pretty new here.😬

No worries😁 , though as a layman, I’d honestly prefer to know nothing at all about medicine. You can certainly imagine why that would be the case😳

I'm asking on behalf of a friend who isn't on here...
What kind of ointment works best for that kind of scar, and how long after giving birth should she wait before using it?

If everything looks fine, there’s zero reason to go slathering anything on it.

Why would she even bother with the ointment? Is she terrified she’s gonna end up with a scar or what?

I didn't even put anything on, and you can barely tell.

So, I’ve been using Neosporin this week, and honestly? I can already tell it’s 👍
. They told me I could start as soon as the scar had healed nicely and there were no scabs left. I actually tried starting about three weeks after giving birth—I applied it for maybe ten days before just giving up on it entirely.
I didn't really notice much of a difference back then, but looking back, I think I just started way too early!
But in just this past week, the edges of the scar have practically vanished, and the raised part in the middle is about 50% flatter already 🙏
. If I stick with it for another two or three weeks, I bet it’ll turn into nothing more than a faint little white line 🙂
.

Well, it really all depends on so many different things... Like how the wound was stitched up in the first place, or just how your skin typically handles scarring...
Me, for instance—I ended up taking a bit more "damage" right in the middle, though maybe that was just because I was being way too impatient about getting out of bed too soon! Who knows?
Either way, those five centimeters (out of the whole twenty or so) are looking pretty swollen and red right now.
But then, on the other end, you can't even tell there was ever a cut at all! It's completely gone.