Roersch van der Hoogte Arjo, Pieters Toine
University of Utrecht, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Descartes Centre for the History and Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, David de Wiedbuilding, Universiteitsweg 99, PO Box 80 082, Utrecht, 3584 CG, The Netherlands.
University of Utrecht, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Descartes Centre for the History and Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, David de Wiedbuilding, Universiteitsweg 99, PO Box 80 082, Utrecht, 3584 CG, The Netherlands.
Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci. 2014 Sep;47 Pt A:12-22. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.05.019. Epub 2014 Jun 28.
The isolation of quinine from cinchona bark in 1820 opened new possibilities for the mass-production and consumption of a popular medicine that was suitable for the treatment of intermittent (malarial) fevers and other diseases. As the 19th century European empires expanded in Africa and Asia, control of tropical diseases such as malaria was seen as crucial. Consequently, quinine and cinchona became a pivotal tool of British, French, German and Dutch empire-builders. This comparative study shows how the interplay between science, industry and government resulted in different historical trajectories for cinchona and quinine in the Dutch and British Empires during the second half of the 19th century. We argue that in the Dutch case the vectors of assemblage that provided the institutional and physical framework for communication, exchange and control represent an early example of commodification of colonial science. Furthermore, both historical trajectories show how the employment of the laboratory as a new device materialised within the colonial context of agricultural and industrial production of raw materials (cinchona bark), semi-finished product (quinine sulphate) and plant-based medicines like quinine. Hence, illustrating the 19th century transition from 'colonial botany' and 'green imperialism' to what we conceptualise as 'colonial agro-industrialism'.
1820年从金鸡纳树皮中分离出奎宁,为大规模生产和消费一种适用于治疗间歇性(疟疾)发热及其他疾病的大众药物开辟了新的可能性。随着19世纪欧洲帝国在非洲和亚洲的扩张,控制疟疾等热带疾病被视为至关重要。因此,奎宁和金鸡纳成为英国、法国、德国和荷兰帝国建设者的关键工具。这项比较研究展示了科学、工业和政府之间的相互作用如何在19世纪下半叶导致荷兰和大英帝国金鸡纳和奎宁不同的历史轨迹。我们认为,在荷兰的案例中,为交流、交换和控制提供制度和物质框架的组合载体代表了殖民科学商品化的早期例子。此外,两条历史轨迹都表明,实验室作为一种新工具是如何在原材料(金鸡纳树皮)、半成品(硫酸奎宁)和奎宁等植物性药物的农业和工业生产的殖民背景中得以实现的。因此,说明了19世纪从“殖民植物学”和“绿色帝国主义”向我们所概念化的“殖民农工业主义”的转变。