'The Romans' withdrawal from Britain was a turning point in the development of medicine and public health.' How far do you agree with this statement? (16 marks)

For the better
1. Had to develop our own ideas without the help + investment of the Romans
  1. Pushed us to take medicine and public health more seriously
    1. This was one of the Romans' legacies to us
2. Let us develop our own ideas without being oppressed by famous Roman + Greek doctors
  1. We then learnt from our own mistakes and took more of an interest in the subject
3. British doctors could now learn from doctors from all over the world, they weren't just restricted to Rome + the Roman Empire
For the worse
1. We no longer had the Roman investment into our country and this meant that we had to fund ourselves
  1. Therefore there was less investment in medicine + public health and more into 'more important' things such as the military
2. No longer had the Roman passion for public health + medicine driving us to care about it
3. A lot of the Roman army doctors were forced to leave along with the army leaving us with a shortage of doctors
The Romans greatly improved our public health + medicine- who knows how much/ long they could have continued with this?
The Romans may have brought us up to date with public health + medicine, but now they were simply oppressing us and stopping us from making improvements ourselves, believing that we were incapable of such a thing.

Resumo de Recurso

	Criado por Bethany Barrett mais de 9 anos atrás