The Renaissance period c1500-1700 is where the medicine-through-time story turns: new anatomical knowledge challenges ancient authority, yet everyday treatment barely changes. That tension between discovery and continuity is exactly what exam questions probe, and it runs through this whole quiz.
The individual-genius questions cover the three names every mark scheme expects. Andreas Vesalius and De Humani Corporis Fabrica (1543) — the work that corrected Galen through direct human dissection; William Harvey and his 1628 demonstration that the heart pumps blood around the body in circulation, with the deliberate distractor that capillaries were a later discovery (Malpighi), testing precision about what Harvey did and did not prove; and Thomas Sydenham, the "English Hippocrates", who moved diagnosis towards close clinical observation of the patient.
The communication questions examine how new ideas actually spread: the printing press breaking the Church's monopoly on medical texts and undermining Galen's unquestioned authority, and the Royal Society (founded 1660) providing the forum for experiment and peer scrutiny.
The Great Plague of 1665 anchors the continuity side. You will identify what people still believed caused it — miasma and astrological alignments, with the actual cause (plague bacteria carried by rat fleas, unknown until the end of the nineteenth century) as a distractor — and what the authorities did: shutting up and marking infected houses, closing theatres, killing cats and dogs. A comparison question draws the explicit line back to the Black Death of 1348 that exam questions on continuity and change demand.
The final synthesis question asks students to characterise the period as a whole: genuine advances in knowledge alongside stubborn continuity in bleeding, purging and humoral treatment at the bedside.
Covers the Renaissance segment of the medicine-through-time thematic study: Vesalius, Harvey and Sydenham, the communication revolution of print and the Royal Society, and the Great Plague of 1665 as a continuity case study.