Comments on: A review of The Poison Trials: Wonder Drugs, Experiment and the Battle for Authority in Renaissance Science by Alisha Rankin

By: Alexa Shipes

Alexa Shipes — Tue, 31 Jan 2023 21:19:49 +0000

Very thorough review of The Poison Trials. When I read about the cure-alls, I wondered how many of them actually worked. Were they just the sixteenth-century equivalent of Victorian patent medicines? Or were they just placebos? I found the author’s inclusion of societal norms surrounding death to be rather interesting. Obviously, the poison trials had to have a veneer of respectability by sixteenth century standards, but by modern standards, the practice stands out as barbaric. When the author brought up COVID in her introduction, I was reminded of vaccine trials. Unlike the poison trials, however, vaccine trials work off the principle of voluntary participation. They also collect data from a broad cross-section of society as a whole. The poison trials, by contrast, were involuntary and represented a small portion of society. That might be because of the fact that these poison trials were conducted for the benefit of aristocrats and royalty. Poisoning was not a problem in everyday Renaissance life, with the sole exception of lead poisoning, which would have trickled in via the water supply in urban areas.

By: Katie Kania

Katie Kania — Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:41:00 +0000

One of the aspects of Alisha Rankin’s book that I enjoyed the most, which you analyze in your review, is that the structure of her work is extremely well organized. I appreciated how the author arranged the book both chronologically and by her arguments/sub-arguments. However, I felt that at some points the author’s argument got lost while she spent time referring back to previous chapters. I liked how you described this method of organization as case-studies that built upon the previous chapter’s information in a “stepping-stone fashion.” Your stepping-stone analogy helped me organize my thoughts on the author’s process. Overall I agree with your thoughts on Rankin’s book; it is very thorough, well-researched, and enjoyable to read. A few questions I have about Rankin’s work – is it *too* well-organized? Are there too many sub-arguments that confuse her overall thesis? I don’t think that there was enough room in one book for Rankin to truly expand on her ideas and research!
I enjoyed reading your book review!