Black Death Dbq
History Coursework Assessment B:
In considering the Process of Change in the Development of Ideas and Practices in Medical Surgery over the whole period c.1000-1650 how far can the Black Death be considered a Turning Point?
Although the Black Death was one of the biggest catastrophes known in Europe, its short term influence was of little consequence. Despite there being many different ideas, practices and surgical procedures present during and after the Black Death, in the long term there was minute progression. In the period c.1000 – 1650 many distinctive turning points occurred in terms of individual achievements, however several relied on recent improvements in such things as technology, and consequently were not turning points unto …show more content…
Plague Doctors were un-aptly named as they were ordinary citizens trying to benefit financially from the pestilence. Guy de Chauliac was a celebrated doctor, one who didn’t flee, despite, according to Pagel (taken from Puschmann's "Handbook of the History of Medicine”) “ecclesiastical interest” funded his medical education. Perhaps the Church’s adamant focus on Galen meant Chauliac was eager to expand on Galen’s ideas rather than disprove them, thus avoiding confrontation. The fact that the Black Death actually produced “the most eminent surgeon of the European Middle Ages” (Encyclopaedia Britannica) seems a great achievement, despite the fact that competition was sparse and de Chauliac’s achievements relatively few. In his book commonly known as “Chirurgia Magna” written in 1363, he cites the difference between bubonic and pneumonic plagues, describes hernias and cataracts, and treatments for all. In fact, he did have many surviving patients during the pestilence due to his realisation that “laudible pus” was necessary in the healing process of buboes and wounds. Surgeons were outraged as cauterization, an aggressive procedure, had always been the correct method and that the wound was never allowed to heal naturally. However, in his works he not only references Galen but also Hippocrates, Abulcasis and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) he only expanded on surgical practice already specified by others. Consequently, his influence is narrowed, and what seems like an abundance of progress is less so. In the long term it is of little significance, therefore the Black Death is not a turning point in surgical
In considering the Process of Change in the Development of Ideas and Practices in Medical Surgery over the whole period c.1000-1650 how far can the Black Death be considered a Turning Point?
Although the Black Death was one of the biggest catastrophes known in Europe, its short term influence was of little consequence. Despite there being many different ideas, practices and surgical procedures present during and after the Black Death, in the long term there was minute progression. In the period c.1000 – 1650 many distinctive turning points occurred in terms of individual achievements, however several relied on recent improvements in such things as technology, and consequently were not turning points unto …show more content…
Plague Doctors were un-aptly named as they were ordinary citizens trying to benefit financially from the pestilence. Guy de Chauliac was a celebrated doctor, one who didn’t flee, despite, according to Pagel (taken from Puschmann's "Handbook of the History of Medicine”) “ecclesiastical interest” funded his medical education. Perhaps the Church’s adamant focus on Galen meant Chauliac was eager to expand on Galen’s ideas rather than disprove them, thus avoiding confrontation. The fact that the Black Death actually produced “the most eminent surgeon of the European Middle Ages” (Encyclopaedia Britannica) seems a great achievement, despite the fact that competition was sparse and de Chauliac’s achievements relatively few. In his book commonly known as “Chirurgia Magna” written in 1363, he cites the difference between bubonic and pneumonic plagues, describes hernias and cataracts, and treatments for all. In fact, he did have many surviving patients during the pestilence due to his realisation that “laudible pus” was necessary in the healing process of buboes and wounds. Surgeons were outraged as cauterization, an aggressive procedure, had always been the correct method and that the wound was never allowed to heal naturally. However, in his works he not only references Galen but also Hippocrates, Abulcasis and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) he only expanded on surgical practice already specified by others. Consequently, his influence is narrowed, and what seems like an abundance of progress is less so. In the long term it is of little significance, therefore the Black Death is not a turning point in surgical