Hello, my name's Mr. Green, and I'm thrilled that you're joining me again to complete our learning all about the artefacts of the Renaissance and what they tell us about it.

I'm so excited to get learning today.

So you ready? Let's go.

Today's lesson is called "Understanding the Artefacts of the Renaissance," and it's from the unit the "Renaissance." What do the artefacts of the Renaissance tell us about it? By the end of today's lesson, we're going to be able to explain how historians use sources to learn about the Renaissance.

There's one keyword for this lesson, and that keyword is artefact.

Let's find out what it means.

An object made by human beings in the past is an artefact.

So in our lesson today, there are three learning cycles that we're gonna follow.

We're gonna look at the artefacts of the Renaissance.

We're going to look at the changes that took place during the Renaissance, and we're gonna think about Renaissance minds.

So let's get started by looking at the artefacts of the Renaissance.

Now, many artefacts survive from the Renaissance, and these can be divided into different sorts.

First sort are written artefacts.

These are pieces of writing that survive from the Renaissance.

So here are some examples that might be familiar to you.

Letters written by Petrarch, Leonardo da Vinci's writing in his notebooks, Copernicus' writings about the orbits of the planets.

These are all examples of written artefacts.

They are pieces of writing from the Renaissance that survive to this day.

Now, another set of artefacts is the art and architecture of the Renaissance, and here are some examples of those.

Holbein's Portrait of Erasmus, Michelangelo's David, St.

Peter's Basilica.

So we've got a portrait, a painting, a sculpture, and a building, a piece of architecture, all different sorts of artefacts that we will call art and architecture of the Renaissance.

The final set of artefacts we might look at are the books of the Renaissance, and here are some examples of those.

So for example, Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body" and Da Vinci's notebooks.

So Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body," which had those special lift the flap sections that could be produced by cutting parts of pages out, sticking them on others, and the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, where he made studies of proportion, of shade, of perspective, drew down his diagrams of potential inventions to get mankind to fly, that sort of thing.

These are the the books of the Renaissance.

Many of them, like Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body," were actually printed on the printing press.

So let's check that you understand what we've just been looking at.

I want you to think which of the following is an example of Renaissance art.

Have a think, pause the video.

When you're ready, press play to check if you are correct.

That's right, it was C, so it was Leonardo da Vinci's portrait of we think Lisa Giocondo.

So the Mona Lisa, very famous painting, that is an example of Renaissance art.

Whereas the Parthenon, A, an ancient building in Greece on of top the Acropolis in Athens.

B, a monastery.

It's a piece of architecture.

So let's check your understanding further.

Lucretius' "De rerum natura" is an example of a Renaissance artefact.

So remember, this was Lucretius' poem where he wrote about how atoms make up the universe and everything within it.

It was rediscovered by Poggio Bracciolini.

So was that an example of a Renaissance artefact, true or false? Press pause and check your answer when ready by pressing play.

The answer is false.

So why is the answer false? I want you to justify your answer by choosing A or B.

Is that because De rerum natura was written during the Roman period? Or was it that B, De rerum natura was written during the period of Ancient Greece? Think about your answer.

Hit pause, and when you're ready to see if you are right, press play again.

That's right.

The answer was, A, De rerum natura was written during the Roman period.

Lucretius was a Roman writer, and although De rerum natura was sort of popularly rediscovered, brought back into Renaissance understanding by Poggio Bracciolini during the Renaissance, it wasn't a Renaissance artefact itself because it was written during the Roman period.

Okay, so what I want us to do is I want us to think about lots of different Renaissance artefacts, and I want you to categorise them into the three categories that we have discussed into written artefacts, art and architecture, and books.

And so an example is being completed for you.

You can see down there, I've taken Van Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait, that portrait of a couple holding hands with amazing intricate detail, an orange on the sideboard, cherry trees through the window, a miniature little self-portrait maybe of Van Eyck in the mirror in the background.

That is an example of art and architecture.

So I want you to take the rest of these Renaissance artefacts and divide them up into the three categories that we've discussed.

So we've got Bruegel's "Hunters in the Snow," painting of ordinary life.

We've got St.

Peter's Basilica, the rebuilt church of St.

Peter in Rome.

We've got the copies of Hans Holbein's "Portrait of Henry VIII" produced to emphasise Henry's power and status.

Da Vinci's "Virgin of the Rocks" with its use of chiaroscuro, the light and the dark.

Michelangelo's sculpture of "David".

Really incredible anatomical detail.

Printed copies of De rerum natura, so Lucretius' poem now printed, most likely printed, well, on the printing press.

Da Vinci's notebooks, where he produced diagrams of flying machines and other adventures.

And the letters from Poggio Bracciolini to Niccolo Niccoli where he spoke of having found a copy of De rerum natura.

Which of the columns do these artefacts fit into? Sort them now, press pause, and hit play when you're ready to check your answer.

So you should have sorted them like this.

Written artefacts.

We have letters from Poggio Bracciolini to Niccolo Niccoli.

These were not books, but they were written.

So they were these letters that Poggio Bracciolini wrote to Niccolo Niccoli.

In art and architecture, you should have put Bruegel's "Hunters in the Snow," St.

Peter's Basilica, Copies of Holbein's "Portrait of Henry VIII," the painting Da Vinci's "Virgin of the Rocks," and the sculpture Michelangelo's "David." And in books, you should have put Da Vinci's notebooks and printed copies of De rerum natura.

Well done.

So now we've looked at the artefacts of the Renaissance and reminded ourselves of those.

Let's have a little look at some of the changes that were taking place during the Renaissance and how these artefacts provide examples of those changes and tell us about those changes.

So the artefacts of the Renaissance can be used together to investigate the changes that took place during this period.

But to do this, we need to ask the right question of them.

We could ask the question, what can these artefacts tell us about the changes that took place in the Renaissance? We ask that question, what can these artefacts tell us about the changes that took place in the Renaissance? Here are some of the answers that we would probably get.

So if we ask that question of the letters written by Petrarch, it would tell us this about the changes.

Tell us that knowledge changed during the Renaissance because humanists like Petrarch rediscovered classical works.

Petrarch wrote to his hero Cicero when he rediscovered some of these.

So we've seen that, haven't we? How Petrarch, when he rediscovered Cicero's letters to Atticus, he wrote a letter to Cicero himself, that informs us of this change in knowledge that was taking place, this rediscovery of classical knowledge.

We ask the same question of Michelangelo's "David." It will elicit this sort of answer.

Tells us how art and science became more closely linked.

Michelangelo's "David" has various details that only someone who understood anatomy would've sculpted.

So you remember that Michelangelo's "David" painstakingly sculpted or chiselled out of marble to incredible detail by Michelangelo with raised veins and muscles that only someone who really understood anatomy would've been able to produce.

So it shows us how during the Renaissance, art and science became really closely linked.

Similarly, if we ask this question about Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body," his book on anatomy, it would tell us how scientific understanding of the human body improved.

Vesalius, remember, published his book to share his new anatomical knowledge and it's full of detailed drawings of the body.

We can see how Vesalius' knowledge of the human body informed by him conducting his own dissections was much more robust and detailed than that that had come before from classical doctors, philosophers, and scholars.

We ask the same question of Bruegel's "Hunters in the Snow." What can it tell us about the changes that took place in the Renaissance? Well, it tells us about that change that took place in art in northern Europe.

It tells us how painting changed in northern Europe during the Renaissance.

If we compare it to Van Eyck's "Arnolfini Portrait," we can see how northern Renaissance artists began to paint scenes of ordinary life.

So remember Bruegel's "Hunters in the Snow" very much focused on an ordinary scene of everyday life compared with some of those more focused, extravagant portraits of before or even some of the religious art that northern Renaissance painters were painting earlier on during this period.

So true or false, Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body" also tells us about how book copying changed.

So is this statement true or is it false? Is this another thing that Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body can tell us about how book copying changed? Is it another thing that can tell us about another change? Sometimes we can find out more than one change from asking this question of an artefact.

So is this true or false? Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body" also tells us about how book copying change.

Pause the video, press play when you want to see if you are right.

Of course it's true.

It does tell us about how book copying changed.

Why do you think that is? Is it A, because in it, Vesalius writes about the way in which his book was produced? Or is it B, "On the Fabric of the Human Body" was printed; it tells us how the printing press changed the way books were copied.

While you think about that, pause the video, press play when you're ready to find out if you were correct.

That's right, it was printed.

So it tells us how the printing press changed the way books were copied.

Remember, thousands of "On the Fabric of the Human Body" were printed all over Europe, spread widely, greatly increasing the anatomical knowledge of the day.

Now, here's an example of someone explaining what an artefact tells us about the changes to scientific knowledge.

Here's an example of someone explaining what an artefact tells us about the changes to scientific knowledge that took place during the Renaissance.

They're looking at the artefacts of Copernicus' map of the universe that you can see there on the left, and they're saying this.

"Copernicus' map of the universe tells us about changes that took place in scientific knowledge during the Renaissance.

The map shows the planets, including Earth, orbiting the Sun.

During the Renaissance, Copernicus challenged Ptolemy's idea that everything orbited around the Earth." So why is this a good explanation of what this artefact tells us about the changes to scientific knowledge? Well, note how they identify what the source can tell us, how they write about the artefact itself.

They provide some description of what they're looking at.

They also describe the change that the artefact illustrates.

So I want you to take that understanding and let's check that you know what makes a good example of explaining what an artefact tells us about the changes to scientific knowledge that took place during the Renaissance.

So here we've got an explanation.

"Vesalius' "On the Fabric of the Human Body" tells us about the changes that took place in anatomical knowledge during the Renaissance.

The detailed drawings in his book show how through dissection, Renaissance scientists found out more about how the human body worked." So I want you to answer aloud or think with the person next to you, why is this a good example? Someone explaining what an artefact tells us about the changes to scientific knowledge that took place during the Renaissance.

Pause the video, press play when you're ready to check your answer.

So that's right.

At first, it identifies what the source can tell us.

Secondly, it describes the artefact itself.

And finally, it describes the change the artefact tells us about.

So let's bring all of what you've just looked at together.

What I want you to do is I want you to pick one of the following artefacts and explain what it tells us about the changes to art that took place during the Renaissance.

I want you to remember to write about the artefact itself.

So you can either choose to look at Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa," or you can choose to look at Da Vinci's "Virgin of the Rocks." But whichever one you choose, you need to explain what it tells us about the changes to art that took place during the Renaissance.

Pause the video.

Remember to play it again when you want to check your answer.

So you might have written about the "Mona Lisa" and you might have written this.

"Da Vinci's painting, the 'Mona Lisa,' tells us about the changes that took place to painting technique during the Renaissance.

Renaissance artists began to paint much more detailed and realistic paintings using new techniques.

In this painting, we can see the use of one of these: sfumato, where the different colours have been carefully blended." Alternatively, you might have written about the "Virgin of the Rocks." "Da Vinci's painting, the 'Virgin of the Rocks', tells us about the changes that took place to painting techniques during the Renaissance.

Renaissance artists began to paint much more detailed and realistic paintings using new techniques.

In this painting, we can see the use of one of these: chiaroscuro, a contrast of light and dark areas." Well done.

Now we're going to look at what these artefacts can tell us about Renaissance minds.

The artefacts of the Renaissance can also be used together to investigate how people thought during the Renaissance.

We can call this investigating Renaissance minds.

To do this though, we need to ask the right question of them.

We could ask the question, what can these artefacts tell us about Renaissance minds? So if we ask the question, what can these artefacts tell us about Renaissance minds, here are some of the answers when we consider these three artefacts.

For Da Vinci's drawings of wings in his notebooks, "They tell us that Da Vinci was very interested in flight.

He produced lots of drawings of inventions that he hoped could be used to help humans fly, often modelled on bird's wings." So although we can't talk to Da Vinci and ask him what he was thinking about, by looking at his notebooks, we can sort of tell.

We look at Holbein's "Portrait of Erasmus." "It tells us how humanist scholars like Erasmus thought their work was very important.

Remember in the painting, Erasmus' work is compared to the tasks of the mythical Hercules." If you look at Van Eyck's "Arnolfini Portrait, "It tells us that wealthy Renaissance people wanted to show off their wealth and status.

In the painting, Van Eyck has painted oranges, which would've been very expensive to show the couple were wealthy and wanted people to know it." True or false.

Van Eyck's "Arnolfini Portrait" only tells us about how the couple in the painting thought.

So just think hard about that portrait, that painting.

Think about what was in it.

Does it only tell us about how the couple in the painting thought? Or does it tell us about someone else and how they were thinking too? Pause the video, press play when you're ready to see if you are right.

That's right.

The answer is false.

So why is it false? Does it also tell us Van Eyck wanted his role as a painter recognised? He painted himself reflected in the mirror behind the couple.

Or does it also tell us that Van Eyck did not like the couple, but he painted them in a way that made them seem arrogant and rude.

Think carefully about that painting.

Press pause and when you're ready to see if you are correct, press play.

That's right, the answer's A.

If you look really carefully at the convex mirror between the couple, we think there's a tiny little self-portrait of Van Eyck, and we think this is because he wanted his role as a painter recognised, so he painted himself reflected in the mirror.

I want you to think about this as well.

Which of the following artefacts might also tell us something about Renaissance minds? So a Medici family portrait, the Pantheon in Rome, or Lucretius' De rerum natura? Pause the video, press play when you're ready to see if you are right.

That's right, the answer is A.

It's a Medici family portrait because remember, they wanted to show off their wealth, their power, their status in portraits like this.

Whereas the Pantheon we know was an ancient building in Rome, an ancient classical building in Rome.

And De rerum natura written by Lucretius was a Roman poet.

So neither of those are Renaissance artefacts.

So I want you to draw together what we've been looking at when we've been thinking about what different artefacts tell us about Renaissance minds.

I want you to look at both these artefacts: St.

Peter's Basilica, a piece of architecture, and a copy of Holbein's "Portrait of Henry VIII." And I want you to think about and explain how they tell us something about Renaissance minds, the way Renaissance people thought, what they were concerned with, what they were interested in.

Remember, you need to write about the artefacts themselves.

You need to mention what the artefacts are and any details from them that are relevant, but you also need to bring in your other knowledge to explain what they tell us about Renaissance minds.

I'm looking forward to reading your paragraphs.

So pause the video and press play when you've written yours.

You might have written about St.

Peter's Basilica like this.

"St.

Peter's Basilica tells us about the minds of Renaissance architects.

It was modelled on classical buildings like the Parthenon and the Pantheon, which can be seen in its columns.

This tells us that classical architecture was important in the minds of Renaissance architects." So look how in that model, we've clearly identified what it tells us, tells us about the minds of Renaissance architects.

We've talked about the artefact itself.

We've said how it was modelled on classical buildings and has columns like the Parthenon and the Pantheon, but also very clearly explain what it tells us about Renaissance minds.

It tells us that classical architecture was really important in the minds of Renaissance architects because they wanted to copy it.

And you might have written this about the copy of Holbein's" "Portrait of Henry VIII." You might have said how it tells us about the minds of Renaissance rulers.

Holbein painted Henry of a strong pose to emphasise his power and status.

The portrait shows us that Henry wanted people to see him as powerful.

Because Henry had the painting copied, it shows us that he wanted as many people as possible to see it." Great job today in a really tough lesson in terms of thinking, so well done.

What I want you to do now is just think about this summary of our learning.

So remember, many artefacts survive from the Renaissance.

These include art, architecture, written artefacts and books.

These artefacts can tell us about the Renaissance if we ask the right questions.

And these artefacts can tell us about the changes that took place in the Renaissance and about the way people thought during the Renaissance.

You've learned so well today.

Well done.

Thank you for your attention.