From Javanese Coca to Java Coca: An Exemplary Product of Dutch Colonial Agro-Industrialism, 1880-1920,”

Access Provided by Utrecht Universiteit at 02/22/13 6:28AM GMT

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 90

From Javanese Coca to Java Coca An Exemplary Product of Dutch Colonial Agro-Industrialism, 1880–1920

ARJO ROERSCH VA N D E R HOOGTE and TOINE PIETERS

Introduction

In 1875 the Botanical Garden of Buitenzorg introduced two coca plants on the island of Java, which was at that time part of the Netherlands East Indies.1 According to the Dutch pharmacist Emma Reens, the Botanical Garden initially had considerable difficulty introducing coca cultivation on Java.2 In 1908 one critic of the coca cultivation program stated that Javanese Arjo Roersch van der Hoogte is a Ph.D. candidate at Utrecht University and Toine Pieters is a professor of the history of pharmacy at Utrecht University. The authors would like to thank Stephen Snelders for his useful feedback and ideas. They would also like to thank the referees and Suzanne Moon for their valuable input and Julia Chalinor for her English manuscript correction services. ©2013 by the Society for the History of Technology. All rights reserved. 0040-165X/13/5401-0004/90–116 1. In the literature there is no consensus in which exact year the two plants arrived at the Botanical Garden. In 1890 its assistant director, Willem Burck, wrote that the Botanical Garden had received the plants in 1875, but later, in 1903, the chief of the agricultural–chemical laboratory and Cultuurtuin, W. R. Tromp de Haas, wrote that the arrival of the plants was in 1878. A. W. K. de Jong, author of most of the scientific literature on coca, wrote in 1948 that the date was 1875. However, Emma Reens wrote in her 1919 dissertation on Javanese coca that the arrival date was 1876. In an 1887 report it is mentioned that the Botanical Garden received two plants from the Belgian firm Herman Linden & Co. in 1875. See Burck, “Opmerkingen over de onder den naam van Erythroxylon coca in Nederlandsch Indië gecultiveerde gewassen,” 385; Tromp de Haas, “Coca-cultuur,” 283a; de Jong, “Coca,” 866–88; Reens, La Coca de Java; and “Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1887,” 32. To be entirely correct, the first coca plants were introduced at Buitenzorg in 1854 when the German botanist Justus Karl Hasskarl (1811–1894) brought several species with him from his expedition in search for cinchona seeds and species in southern Peru. However, Hasskarl’s seeds and species were lost. See P. H. van der Kemp and A. H. Berkhout, “Dr. Hasskarl's mislukte poging tot invoering der coca-cultuur op Java,” 413–58. 2. Reens, La Coca de Java.

90

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 91

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

coca would never compete with the well-known Peruvian coca because the leaves lacked sufficient cocaine. He blamed the stubbornness of the scientists working in the Botanical Garden for pursuing this specific coca species instead of the well-known Peruvian one.3 However, around the beginning of the twentieth century, the prospects for Javanese coca had already begun to take a new turn.4 Within a thirty-year period, starting in 1892, Java succeeded in becoming the world’s leading exporter of coca leaves, surpassing the traditional coca producers in Peru and Bolivia. How and why did this occur? We will argue that the story of the transformation of Javanese coca into “Java coca” as part of a “branding” process is closely linked to the rise of the ethical pharmaceutical industry in Europe and a laboratory revolution in botany, chemistry, and pharmacy.5 The story is also one of transnational circulation of experts, expertise, and the coca plants and leaves that traveled among South America, Europe, and Southeast Asia. As such, it links many sites of technological development and practice: the hills of Peru; laboratories and experimental fields at Buiten-zorg; planter’s fields in Java; and cocaine-extraction facilities and pharmaceutical plants in Europe. Furthermore, it serves as an exemplary case study of how the demands for standardization, rationalization, and efficacy dramatically affected the development, production, and distribution of plant-based medicines at the end of the nineteenth century and vice versa.6 The historical trajectory from Javanese coca to Java coca can be understood in the wider historiography of nineteenth-century science and technology as a case study illustrating the transition from colonial botany and “green imperialism” to what we conceptualize as “colonial agro-industrialism.” Historians like Londa Schiebinger, Claudia Swan, and Richard Grove have variously conceptualized the search for plants and objects during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as colonial botany or green imperialism. In these interpretations botany sat at the center of European colonial expansion, a form of exchange that was also a product of the coevolution 3. G. van der Sleen, “Over Java-coca,” 1–18. 4. Reens, La Coca de Java; See figure 17.5 in Hans H. Bosman, “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek and Its Successors,” 397. 5. Andrew Cunningham and Perry Williams, eds., The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine; Jonathan Liebenau, Medical Science and Medical Industry; Wolfgang Wimmer, “Wir haben fast immer was Neues”; Anthony S. Travis et al., Determinants in the Evolution of the European Chemical Industry, 1900–1939; Roy Church and E. M. Tansey, Burroughs Wellcome & Co. 6. Cunningham and Williams, eds., The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine; Jonathan Liebenau, Gregory J. Higby, and Elaine C. Stroud, eds., Pill Peddlers; Carsten Burhop, “Pharmaceutical Research in Wilhelmine Germany,” 1–30. According to Robert Fox and Anna Guagnini, one important development in the concepts and practices of research in industrial Europe during the nineteenth century was that “the increasingly powerful ideals of laboratory-based pedagogy and research affected and were affected by the unprecedented emphasis on the industrial applications of science” (see Fox and Guagnini, Laboratories, Workshops, and Sites, 42).

91

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 92

C U LT U R E

of science and commerce. The result was the creation of a global network of botanical gardens supported by scientists, naturalists, and adventurists in search of this green gold.7 From the mid-eighteenth century onward, botany developed into big business and industrial research as part of the emerging colonial empires and the Industrial Revolution. The overall scientific and commercial interest in colonial flora and fauna and the interaction among science, commerce, and colonialism intensified from the eighteenth to the nineteenth centuries, developing into both big business and a form of industrial research. Agro-industrialism conceptualizes the development of a specific configuration among science, commerce, industry, and the nation-state within the context of the modernization process of the nineteenth century, the rise of modern science and technology—especially the laboratory sciences—industrialization, and the modern nation-state. For example, in the southern United States an agro-industrial system incorporating research into commodity crops like sugar, cotton, and tobacco had emerged by the beginning of the twentieth century. Planters’ associations in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture established science-based technology, research, and education centers, programs promoting the use of artificial selection and elaboration, and other activities.8 Colonial agro-industrialism refers to a particular subset of this broader category of activity, whereby tropical crops were made exploitable and profitable by both governmental and private agricultural laboratories led and organized by university-trained scientists. Elite groups of policymakers, planters, bankers, and industrialists had come to realize that scientific knowledge and technical prowess were keys to wealth and power. This group of stakeholders recognized that efficient overseas-transport networks allowed tons of raw plant materials to be processed by large-scale industrial complexes using the integrated management of labor, extraction, and standardization technology, as well as expertise, capital, and distribution networks in the colonial motherland. The Botanical Garden at Buitenzorg acted within the Dutch Empire as a central conduit in the system of colonial agro-industrialism, facilitating the industrialized exploitation of important commodity crops like cinchona, sugar, coffee, tea, and, of course, coca. To obtain a fuller understanding of colonial agro-industrialism, this article describes the historical trajectory of Javanese coca to Java coca—a niche product of economic importance in Dutch colonial agriculture— from an experimental plant variety in 1880 to a commercial colonial cash crop and highly valued commodity for the international pharmaceutical 7. Richard Drayton, Nature’s Government; Londa Schiebinger and Claudia Swan, eds., Colonial Botany; Richard Grove, Green Imperialism; Harold J. Cook, Matters of Exchange. 8. Deborah Fitzgerald, “Beyond Tractors,” 114–26; Pete Daniel, Breaking the Land; John Alfred Heitmann, The Modernization of the Louisiana Sugar Industry, 1830–1910.

92

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 93

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

industry by 1920. We will highlight the changing context of the Botanical Garden at Buitenzorg (also known as ’s Lands Plantentuin), which evolved from an outpost of an international network of botanical gardens where tropical plants were collected and exchanged into a modern, large-scale research facility consisting of laboratories and field stations performing scientific research in the service of a colonial agricultural enterprise. The Botanical Garden played a pivotal role as a nexus of scientific and commercial activity that allowed Java coca to compete with and eventually dominate Peruvian coca on the global market. ’s Lands Plantentuin: From Outpost to Internationally Renowned Research Center, 1817–1904

At the start of the twentieth century the Botanical Garden of Buitenzorg had earned a reputation as a renowned international center for research in tropical plants and cultivation, characterized by researchers as “the finest institution in the tropics for the aid of agriculture.”9 An important element of the Botanical Garden’s reputation was the joint application of botany and chemistry as a means to create colonial cash crops that would be both exploitable and profitable, such as cinchona, coffee, tea, and rubber. When the first two coca plants arrived in the second half of the 1870s, however, this reputation had yet to be earned. From its founding in 1817 until the late 1860s, the Botanical Garden was a rather typical colonial garden interested primarily in the collection and exchange of plants, and it was linked to other botanical gardens in Europe like Kew Gardens near London, the Jardin du Roi in Paris, and the Botanical Garden of Leiden University in the Netherlands. It was not until after the mid-nineteenth century that the Botanical Garden at Buitenzorg became a pivotal agent in aiding the growth of a large-scale colonial-plantation economy.10 The first step in transforming ’s Lands Plantentuin occurred in 1851 with the establishment of an agricultural–chemical laboratory under the auspices of a leading Dutch professor of chemistry in the nineteenth century, Gerrit Jan Mulder (1803–1880). Mulder sent one of his doctoral students, P. F. H. Fromberg, to Buitenzorg to oversee his interests in the laboratory and to 9. Annals of the Royal Gardens, Peradeniya; Andrew Goss, Floracrats, chap. 3. 10. Goss, Floracrats; Grove, Green Imperialism; Londa Schiebinger, Plants and Empire. With regard to the history of the Botanical Garden of Buitenzorg, there is no adequate scientific-historical survey. The Botanical Garden’s history had been written several times, for the commemoration years 1892, 1917, and 1942; however, all of them repeat the same facts and lack analyses of the role of the institution in its colonial setting. In recent historical studies concerning colonial Indonesia, there has been some attention to the history of the Botanical Garden, but only from particular perspectives. See Harro Maat, Science Cultivating Practice; Suzanne Moon, Technology and Ethical Idealism; and Goss, Floracrats.

93

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 94

C U LT U R E

deploy chemistry to improve and exploit agricultural crops.11 Mulder’s role in the founding of the laboratory at Buitenzorg in 1851 is closely connected to what historian Andrew Goss has called “the bedrock of science” in the Dutch East Indies: the cinchona-cultivation program. This program marked a new period in agricultural cultivation in which chemistry became a tool for colonial agriculture, specifically for improving existing large-scale colonial plantations.12 The laboratory did not survive Fromberg’s death in 1858, and it took almost thirty years before a similar laboratory was reestablished at Buitenzorg. But the idea of jointly applying chemistry and botany remained. When botanist R. H. C. C. Scheffer (1844–1880) was appointed director of the Botanical Garden in 1868, experimental botany became the central theme for the scientists working there. Scheffer extended the garden’s collection by reestablishing contact with other gardens and scientific centers and exchanging plants and knowledge.13 Furthermore, he created a facility, the so-called Cultuurtuin (cultivation garden), where chemistry was applied to improve agricultural crops for the sole purpose of producing profitable commodities.14 Melchior Treub (1851–1910), who was Scheffer’s successor, completed the transformation of the Botanical Garden as a site for scientific experimentation.15 By the end of Treub’s directorship (1880–1909) the Botanical Garden included a complex of field stations and chemical–botanical laboratories that aimed to improve and exploit colonial agriculture for monetary profit. He had reestablished the agricultural–chemical laboratory in 1884, and by 1890 also created a chemical–pharmaceutical laboratory to this end. Furthermore, Treub incorporated privately owned field stations financed by several agricultural syndicates (for example, those for coffee, rubber, and cacao) into the scientifically influential sphere of the Botanical Garden.16 Botanists, chemists, and pharmacists worked at the garden with local and exotic plants and exchanged knowledge with private and government-owned plantations, as well as with international scholars and institutions, making it an important site for the production and circulation of agricultural knowledge and expertise in addition to specimens. One of the plants that was transformed into an exploitable and profitable agricultural commodity by the efforts of the Botanical Garden was Javanese coca, a product that emerged in direct competition with the better-established Peruvian coca. 11. H. A. M. Snelders, De geschiedenis van de scheikunde in Nederland; Snelders, Wetenschap en Intuïtie. 12. Goss, Floracrats, 47; “Het belang der chemie voor onze koloniën,” 445. 13. Maat, Science Cultivating Practice, 40–41; Goss, Floracrats, 57. 14. J. Sibinga Mulder, “’s Lands Plantentuin 1817–15 April 1942,” 308; Theo F. Rijnberg, ’s Lands Plantentuin, Buitenzorg 1817–1992, 55. 15. C. Koningsberger, ’s Lands Plantentuin onder Melchior Treub. 16. Goss, Floracrats, 80. The only syndicate that refused to join Treub’s network was the syndicate of sugar planters; see Wim van der Schoor, “Biologie en landbouw,” 145–61. Treub later created facilities that were specifically aimed at food agriculture and

94

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 95

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

Regional Production and Local Consumption: The Organization of Peruvian Coca

By the mid-nineteenth century, coca, the “divine plant of the Incas,” was lauded for its stimulant effects by Peruvians and Europeans alike.17 Despite such interest and the popularization of coca wines like Vin Mariani, it was not until 1884 that coca and its most important alkaloid, cocaine—isolated in 1859 by Göttingen chemist Albert Niemann—became sought-after medical substances. The “discovery” in 1884 by Austrian surgeon Karl Koller that cocaine was an excellent anesthetic and the famous cocaine papers of Sigmund Freud set the stage for the growing demand for coca leaves from Peru. Peruvian coca became the raw source for what has been called the first modern panacea of Western medicine—cocaine.18 Between 1884 and 1905 Peruvian exports of coca leaves and crude cocaine to the European and North American medical markets rose exponentially to almost ten tons of the latter and a thousand tons of of the former.19 In Paul Gootenberg’s extensive history of cocaine in the Andes, he found that by the late 1880s Peru was able to satisfy the growing demand by pharmaceutical manufacturers because of the combined response of Peruvian planters, peasants, pharmacists, and factory entrepreneurs.20 In 1884 a French immigrant in Peru, pharmacist Alfred Bignon, developed an extraction method resulting in an easy and economical preparation of crude cocaine that was viable in the regions where coca was cultivated.21 The Bignon method (a method still used today by drug traffickers and local farmers to create cocaine paste) produced a semi-crystallized cocaine (crude cocaine) that could be exported more easily and cheaply than coca leaves.22 Thus by the late 1890s Peru dominated the world’s coca and crude cocaine markets, exporting the latter mainly to German cocaine manufacturers through the port of Hamburg. Given the dominant position of Peruvian coca in the 1890s, how can we increasing food supplies, however, not with the same profit-seeking perspective as described here. See Moon, Technology and Ethical Idealism; and Goss, Floracrats. 17. See Paul Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine; and Bettina Wahrig, “Fabelhafte Dinge,” 1–20. 18. Joseph Spillane, Cocaine; Richard Davenport-Hines, The Pursuit of Oblivion; Antonio Escohotado, Historia General de las Drogas. 19. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine; David Musto, “International Traffic in Coca through the Early 20th Century,” 145–56; Ruggiero Romano, “Coca buena, coca mala?” 297–352. In order to make one kilogram of pure cocaine (HCL), approximately 100 kilograms of coca leaves are needed. See Emma Reens, La Coca de Java; and Theodor Walger, Die Coca. For a statistical and critical overview of the Peruvian export see Bosman, “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek,” 343–79. 20. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 62. 21. A. Bignon, “La Cocaina y sus sales,” 231–34; Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 31–39. 22. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, chap. 2.

95

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 96

C U LT U R E

explain its downfall in the subsequent fifteen years? Gootenberg emphasizes developments outside of Peru, including changes in the pharmaceutical industry and the movements of commodity chains, including the Andean– German, Dutch–European, and Japanese–pan-Asian.23 However, he does not give sufficient attention to other circumstances within Peru that contributed to the downfall of its coca by the start of the 1910s: namely, the predominance of small- rather than large-scale production without any sort of centralized producers’ organization, and the absence of a scientific infrastructure to improve the quality of the leaves. After 1900 most coca production in Peru was concentrated in the southern part of the country near Cusco; in the central part near Huánuco; and also around the northern city of Trujillo.24 Except for a few large-scale production plantations near Huánuco and those in northern Peru after 1900, most coca production was characterized by small-scale cultivation fields. These fields were distributed over vast and difficult-to-access regions and produced coca that was usually for local consumption only. Due to the absence of a strong and reliable centralized producers’ organization and with no special government support of the industry, these local fields and production regions remained fragmented from one another and over time were incapable of adequately responding to the technological changes demanded by overseas (pharmaceutical) cocaine markets.25 The export of Peruvian coca also suffered from the lack of rapid transportation networks between the coca production regions on the eastern slopes of the Andes and coastal Pacific ports.26 Despite this handicap, Peru managed to dominate the coca and crude cocaine world markets at the end of the nineteenth century mainly because it produced bulk quantities of coca, and also because the other foremost producer, neighboring Bolivia, grew it mostly for domestic use.27 In 1905, for example, the Peruvian consul in New York wrote to the Peruvian minister of foreign relations that although various coca experiments had been carried out in other nations, none had suc23. Ibid., 141. 24. Ibid., 64; Musto, “International Traffic in Coca,” 145–56; Romano, “Coca buena, coca mala?” According to contemporary nineteenth-century Peruvians, the best coca leaves could be found in the province of Cusco, near the town of Urubamba; see H. Guillaume, The Amazon Provinces of Peru as a Field for European Emigration; Mariano Martín Albornoz, Breves apuntes sobre las regiones amazónicas; and José G. Clavero, El Tesoro del Perú. According to Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, however, most of the coca and raw cocaine destined for the export market came from the central region around Huánuco. 25. In two studies contemporaneous to the events depicted here the government had been criticized for its inaction toward improving the conditions of production and especially the export of this “precious Peruvian treasure for humankind”; see Clavero, El Tesoro del Perú (1896) and Carlos Enrique Paz Soldan, Un Memorandum sobre la situación actual de la coca peruana (1936). 26. Joseph A. Gagliano, “The Popularization of Peruvian Coca,” 164–79; Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 76–83. 27. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 76–83; Romano, “Coca buena, coca mala?”

96

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 97

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

ceeded. He concluded that it would be “unlikely that our product would ever meet a competitor on the market.”28 This lack of competition, the abundance of fertile land, and the Peruvian national emphasis on exporting as many raw products as possible—epitomized by its large guano exports—resulted in a singular focus on bulk export production instead of on improvements in quality.29 Indeed, when in 1911 Emmanuel Pozzi-Escot, a chemist working at the Peruvian National School of Agriculture, asked the minister of development if he could commence a series of experiments to improve the quality of coca (as he had done with other agricultural products like potatoes, sugar, and cotton) he received no response.30 According to Gootenberg, Peruvian coca production based on the Bignon extraction method of 1884 remained rudimentary until the late 1940s.31 Scientists and Planters: Experimenting with Javanese Coca

Javanese coca differed botanically and chemically from the coca produced in Peru. Nineteenth-century botanists classified Javanese coca as belonging to the species Erythroxylum coca, var. novogranatense that originated from northern Peru and Colombia, while Peruvian coca was considered to be the ordinary species E. coca originating from central and southern Peru and Bolivia.32 However different the two in terms of species and variety, this does not explain the eventual success of Javanese coca; instead, the plantbreeding program in the colony accounts for it. At the Botanical Garden at 28. Eduardo Higgenson, “Informe sobre el comercio entre Nueva York y Peru del año 1905,” 186–87. 29. Illustrative in this regard was the call in 1886 by a professor of the San Marcos National University of Lima that Peru had to produce as much coca as possible now that it had become a high-demand commodity; see Carlos Lisson, Breves apuntes sobre la sociología del Perú en 1886, 67–68. On the existing national idea of exporting as much as possible, see, among others, Carlos Contreras and Marcos Cueto, Historia del Perú Contemporáneo; and Julio Cotler, Clases, Estado y Nación en el Perú. 30. Emmanuel Pozzi-Escot, “Importancia industrial de los alcaloides,” 30–34. 31. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 149–57. 32. The genus Erythroxylum consists of two cultivated species, with each species having two varieties. The first species is Erythroxylum coca, with its two varieties, E. coca var. coca and E. coca var. ipadu; the second species is Erythroxylum novogranatense, with its two varieties, E. novogranatense var. novogranatense and E. novogranatense var. truxiliense. Javanese coca belongs to E. novogranatense var. novogranatense (Colombian coca), while Peruvian coca can be considered to be the central and southern E. coca var. coca (Huánuco or Bolivian coca) or the northern E. novogranatense var. truxiliense (Trujillo coca). However, the bulk of the coca leaves exported to Europe were the E. coca var. coca coca leaves. See Timothy Plowman, “The Ethnobotany of Coca (Erythroxylum spp., Erythroxylaceae)”; and Stephen D. Emche et al., “AFLP Phylogeny of 36 Erythroxylum Species: Genetic Relationships among Erythroxylum Species Inferred by AFLP Analysis,” 126–33. See also Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 16. For the late-nineteenth-century botanical names, see Timothy Plowman, “The Identification of Coca (Erythroxylum Species),” 329–53.

97

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 98

C U LT U R E

Buitenzorg, coca was transformed into a Javanese cultivated plant adapted to local environments by scientific interventions. This early form of plantbreeding experimentation and manipulation was linked to the growing importance of laboratory-based scientific approaches to agriculture. The growth of commercial and industrial demand for coca in the late nineteenth century made coca a potentially valuable plantation crop, and the reestablishment of the agricultural–chemical laboratory at the Botanical Garden in 1884 rendered the necessary experimentation possible. In annual reports of the Botanical Garden coca was only sporadically mentioned between 1875 and 1884; however, the reports from 1884 to 1890 refer to coca experimentation far more extensively. During the latter period, a network of scientists, planters, traders, and industrialists emerged, all cooperating to make Javanese coca exploitable and profitable. During the first series of experiments (1884–88) Botanical Garden botanists and chemists had to actively cooperate and exchange knowledge with planters and state officials regarding the cultivation of coca. The Botanical Garden distributed seeds to planters, and in return the planters provided information regarding their field experiments.33 A direct result of this knowledge exchange was that in 1886 scientists at the Botanical Garden created a manual for coca planters on how to sow coca seeds and cultivate the plants.34 Later work also established the significance of altitude, climate, and soil type for the succesful cultivation of the crop. Furthermore, scientists like K. W. van Gorkum (a cinchona expert) provided economic advice as well, suggesting in 1885 that planters cultivate coca as a niche product that was supplemental to their main products like coffee, sugar, and tea because of the still strong competition from Peruvian coca and the instability of European markets.35 Parallel to these practical experiments, three important chemical-lab investigations conducted by botanists, chemists, and pharmacists in the reestablished chemical–pharmaceutical lab determined the properties of Javanese coca. The first was conducted in 1885–86 by a retired professor of chemistry from the University of Tokyo, F. Eijkman. As a visiting scholar he researched the amount of alkaloids in the various Erythroxylum species the 33. In 1885 eighteen names were mentioned of planters who sent back reports of their findings to the Botanical Garden. In 1886 nineteen petitioners for seeds sent reports, and in 1887 fifteen. 34. Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1886. 35. Reens, La Coca de Java, 62. K. W. van Gorkum had served more than twenty years (1856–78) as a scientist for the Dutch East Indies government. Besides being one of the leading cinchona experts and for a time serving as head and inspector of the government’s cinchona program, van Gorkum was also employed, at the beginning of his career during the 1850s, as assistant to the agricultural–chemical laboratory’s director. At the end of his career van Gorkum served as the chief inspector of the sugar and rice cultivation programs. See J. Dekker, “In Memoriam: Dr. K. W. van Gorkum,” 199–200.

98

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 99

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

Botanical Garden possessed.36 His finding was clear: the E. coca had considerably more alkaloids than other Erythroxylum (such as montanum, retusum, and laurifolium) and therefore was the best agricultural crop for the medicinal production of cocaine.37 In 1888 Maurits Greshoff, who was recently appointed to conduct chemical–pharmaceutical research on the plants found in the Javanese archipelago for their possible medicinal properties, investigated the amount of alkaloids in E. coca leaves.38 Researching coca leaves of various ages, Greshoff concluded that the highest concentration of alkaloids could be found in the younger leaves. This finding was important because at that time the leading production centers in Peru only used older leaves, assuming that they contained the highest cocaine content.39 Moreover, Greshoff determined that in addition to cocaine, other “ecgonine-combinations, socalled amorphous coca bases” were found in the leaves and that these could be added to the cocaine content when determining the total amount of alkaloids.40 His recommendation therefore was that “for the time being, the determination of the total amount of alkaloids is the only reliable criterion in [e]valuating the leaves,” and for “rational culture [that is, profitable cultivation of coca] the knowledge of this fact [that the younger leaves contain more alkaloids] can be considered of great significance.”41 Greshoff’s research made scientists and planters on Java realize that their coca was different from Peruvian coca. In response, scientists at the Botanical Garden led by Willem Burck, the assistant director, launched a study exploring the differences between Javanese and Peruvian coca, reporting their results in the first issue of the journal Teysmannia in 1890.42 This was the first publication to classify Javanese coca as a different coca species than the Peruvian coca. The publication presented the botanical differences between what Burck and his colleagues identified as E. coca, var. spruceanum, or Javanese coca, and the species E. coca (sometimes called E. bolivianum), which were both present at the Botanical Garden.43 According to their research, 36. More than 200 species of the genus Erythroxylum can be found in the tropics, among which are E.coca and E.novogranatense; see Plowman, “The Ethnobotany of Coca,” 63. 37. J. F. Eijkman, Een bezoek aan ’s Lands Plantentuin, 50–57. 38. R. D. Koolhaas, “Half a Century of Phytochemical Research,” 207; J. Dekker, “In Memoriam: Dr. M. Greshoff,” 1–6. 39. Plowman, “The Identification of Coca,” 329–53, and “The Ethnobotany of Coca,” 62–111; Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine. 40. Maurits Greshoff, “Over het alcaloidgehalte van coca op Java gekweekt,” 73. 41. Ibid., 73–74. 42. Burck, “Opmerkingen over de onder den naam van Erythroxylon coca.” 43. According to Plowman, Burck had misinterpreted an 1889 text of Sir Daniel Morris, the director of Kew Gardens, regarding this new Erythroxylum coca, the novogranatense. Burck mistakenly thought that the two plants the Botanical Garden received were part of a variety collected by American botanist Richard Spruce in the Colombian–Peruvian Amazonia region during the mid-nineteenth century, but that they were

99

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 100

C U LT U R E

which combined field and laboratory experiments, E. coca, var. spruceanum had smaller leaves but grew more rapidly in the Javanese climate; E. coca had larger leaves but had to be shaded, which slowed its growth.44 Their published research is important not because it changed the botanical nomenclature, but instead for guiding planters to focus on cultivating E. coca, var. spruceanum because the more leaves that the coca could produce, the more alkaloids could be extracted and the higher the crop’s value. Burck and colleague’s 1890 published research was the final step leading to the commercial and industrial cultivation of Javanese coca. In the following year Teysmannia published an article on the progress of the conversion methods of coca by German scientists, first using the name “Java coca.”45 The Temporary Failure of Java Coca

The transformation of Java coca into a cash crop was closely associated with the rise of an ethical pharmaceutical industry in Europe and the gradually increasing demands for standardization, rationalization, and efficacy of medicines. In 1889 the first planter started producing Java coca commercially, and in 1890 the first shipments of Java coca were sent to European markets.46 However, European traders and manufacturers considered the Java coca leaves, with their low cocaine content, to be inferior in quality.47 Therefore over the next few years Java coca, despite its competitive pricing, gained only a small portion of the European coca market. Consequently, between 1890 and 1905 the number of acres cultivated with Java coca remained limited.48 In 1908 chemist G. van der Sleen, in an article concerning Java coca, concluded that while the Dutch were able to introduce a superior quality of cinchona through a system of crop innovation, they had failed to do the same with coca.49 equal in rank to the new variety Morris had described. See Plowman, “The Identification of Coca,” 337–41. The E. Bolivianum was no other than the Erythroxylon coca var. coca. According to Plowman, the name E. Bolivianum derives from the commercial name given to the Bolivian and southern–central Peruvian coca by American pharmacist Edward R. Squibb in 1885, who furthermore named the E. novogranatense var. truxiliense “Peruvian coca” (Plowman, “The Identification of Coca,” 333–34). 44. Burck, “Opmerkingen over de onder den naam van Erythroxylon coca.,” 385. These results correspond with those of Alfredo Bignon in Lima a few year earlier when he compared the southern–central E. coca with “a new coca species,” the E. novogranatense. See A. Bignon, “Sobre una nueva coca del norte del Perú,” 36–37. See also Plowman, “The Ethnobotany of Coca,” 62–111; and Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 41. 45. “Een nieuw alcaloïde uit Java-coca,” 511. 46. Marcel de Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 57. 47. Reens, La Coca de Java. 48. According to the Handboek voor cultuur- en handelsondernemingen in Nederlands-Indië, only two plantations were cultivating coca in 1905. 49. Van der Sleen, “Over Java-coca,” 5.

100

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 101

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

Why did Java coca fail? The answer lies in the technological limitations of the pharmaceutical industry during the late nineteenth century, and the remoteness of the scientists at Buitenzorg and the regional character of its scientist–planter network. When the scientists at the Botanical Garden’s agricultural–chemical laboratory recommended the cultivation of Java coca for its superior content of cocaine (thus adding the ecgonine alkaloids as “amorphous coca bases” to the total cocaine content), they most likely ignored the fact that European cocaine manufacturers would only value the Java coca for its more readily extractable cocaine alkaloid. Since this coca contained far less of the cocaine alkaloid its processing costs were significantly higher than those for Peruvian coca, thus raising doubts that commercial cultivation of Java coca could continue.50 The Botanical Garden’s scientists must have known that this low amount of cocaine alkaloid would cause problems, because in 1888 two shipments of Java coca leaves were sent to the leading cocaine manufacturer, the pharmaceutical firm E. Merck, for analysis of the cocaine content. According to the firm, both shipments contained notably small quantities of the cocaine alkaloid. In the Botanical Garden’s annual report for 1888 this analysis was disregarded, based on the argument that the drying process of the leaves was as yet inadequate.51 Thus the Botanical Garden’s criterion, based on Greshoff ’s recommendations, for appraising Java coca’s leaves by using the total level of cocaine alkaloids or ecgonine base was not the same as E. Merck’s and that of other European manufacturers. Whether this difference was due to the remoteness of the Botanical Garden from European centers of processing or overconfidence in its crop-improvement system, it resulted in the initial failure of Java coca to attain commercial success. A second reason why Java coca failed was its uselessness as a raw material for the many galenic preparations that were available on the market at the end of the nineteenth century, again based on its low yields of readily extractable cocaine.52 In 1888, for example, Dutch pharmacist J. B. Nagelvoort received a sample of Java coca that he used to determine the amount of the cocaine alkaloid it contained in order to advise Parke, Davis & Co. of Detroit, a company that had expressed an interest in using the Java leaves in tonics and elixirs.53 Since Nagelvoort was unable to demonstrate the presence of sufficient amounts of the alkaloid after applying conventional extraction procedures, he recommended that Parke, Davis not substitute Java coca for the Bolivian coca the company was already using at the time. A decade later 50. Reens, La Coca de Java. For doubts about the prospects of coca cultivation, see the article “Cocaïne,” 7. 51. Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1888, 38–44. 52. Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 125. 53. J. B. Nagelvoort, “Folia Coca.”

101

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 102

C U LT U R E

the Dutch Pharmaceutical Journal drew the same conclusion: Java coca could be used only in the production of pure cocaine drug products.54 Java coca was unsuccessful because it could not meet the alkaloid standards set by the pharmaceutical industry in the 1880s. The technological limitations of cocaine manufacturers made it impossible to convert the ecgonine base into cocaine on a large scale. The regional character of the scientist–planter network prevented a successful conversion of Java coca’s qualities to commercial needs at the end of the 1880s. But technological and regulatory developments within the pharmaceutical industry during the first decade of the twentieth century and the continued efforts on the parts of scientists and planters to improve the quality of Java coca would change its prospects dramatically. Java Coca: Conforming to New Industrial Standards

By the end of the nineteenth century the European and American medical markets were overrun by a variety of patent medicines, produced by a growing number of manufacturers and laboratories that had shifted to the mass production of drugs.55 This rapid growth of the packaged patentmedicine industry (so-called nostrum-makers) and its unrestrained marketing during the last quarter of the nineteenth century resulted in severe criticism from the medical profession and threatened to undermine the emerging pharmaceutical industry. With insufficient information about the composition of patent medicines, it was difficult to impose quality controls, especially because their advertisements “went well beyond the scientifically informed advice the doctor and pharmacist could offer the patient.”56 The medical profession characterized patent medicines and their marketers as threats to society and public health. Cocaine-containing elixirs and tonics were among the most criticized because they were widely sold without adequate information about their effects on buyers and, moreover, the medicines were of poor quality.57 In this climate, “ethical” pharmaceutical companies successfully distinguished themselves from the producers of patent medicines by creating a trustworthy scientific image of drug innovation, drug standards, and medical progress. By presenting themselves as the gatekeepers of safe and effective drug development and distribution, these 54. “Het Cocavraagstuk” (Pharmaceutisch Weekblad), 980–84. In 1920 pharmacist Emma Reens wrote in the Dutch Pharmaceutical Journal that Java coca was not suited for galenic preparations; see Reens, “De Java-coca,” 341–48. 55. Frank Huisman, “Van bedreiging tot bondgenoot,” 443–78, and “Patiëntenbeelden in een moderniserende samenleving,” 217; and James Harvey Young, The Toadstool Millionaires. 56. Huisman, “Van bedreiging tot bondgenoot,” 453. 57. For the specific case of cocaine, see Paul Gootenberg, ed., Cocaine; and Spil-lane, Cocaine.

102

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 103

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

pharmaceutical companies allied with doctors and pharmacists and fought against both patent-medicine producers and the practice of self-medication.58 To ensure safety and efficacy these companies created in-house laboratories where high-quality medicines were developed and tested. And these demanded the best raw materials.59 Developments within the German pharmaceutical industry affected these raw materials in a way that would prove to be important for Java coca. In the 1880s German chemists and pharmaceutical manufacturers innovated more economical chemical methods to extract cocaine from coca leaves, seeking ways for extraction from the ecgonine base that both Greshoff and Bignon were studying.60 In 1885 chemist Willy Merck (of the family that owned E. Merck) was the first to prove that ecgonine (a combination of the alkaloids isatropylcocaine and cinammylcocaine) could be converted into cocaine. His method, however, was too costly for industrial production.61 Three years later, two other German chemists, Carl Liebermann and Fritz Giesel, succeeded in creating a chemical method of converting ecgonine into cocaine, which was patented as the “ecgonine process.”62 Giesel worked as a chemist for the pharmaceutical company Buchler & Co. (also known as the Chininfabrik Braunschweig), thus making it probable that Buchler had been the first to make use of this conversion method.63 At the same time, two other German pharmaceutical firms were producing cocaine from ecgonine: Faberwerke Hoëchst in Frankfurt and C. F. Boehringer & Sohne in Mannheim. In 1888 Boehringer had patented a method that converted ecgonine into ecgonine methyl ester, which was then converted into cocaine. Meanwhile, in 1893 chemists at Faberwerke Hoëchst developed an improved process that could be used in combination with the two earlier patents.64 58. Toine Pieters, Historische trajecten in de farmacie, 6. 59. For the rise of the ethical pharmaceutical industry, see Liebenau, Medical Science and Medical Industry; John P. Swann, Academic Scientists and the Pharmaceutical Industry; Church and Tansey, Burroughs Wellcome & Co.; Wimmer, “Wir haben fast immer was Neues”; Judy Slinn, “Research and Development in the UK Pharmaceutical Industry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1960s,” 168–86; and Huisman, “Van bedreiging tot bondgenoot,” 443–78. 60. Jyri Soininen, “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine,” 42–44. 61. Nagelvoort, “Folia Coca,” 4; Albrecht Hirschmüller, “E. Merck und das Kokain,” 127; Soininen, “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine,” 42. 62. Willy Merck, “Ueber Cocain.” See also Nagelvoort, “Folia Coca,” 4; “Kunstmatige cocaïne”; Hirschmüller, “E. Merck und das Kokain,” 127; and Soininen, “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine,” 42. Despite the fact that Greshoff did his research in the same year as Liebermann and Giesel, he is not mentioned in the article in Dutch Pharmaceutical Journal regarding the invention of synthetic cocaine. Is this then an example of what Peruvian medical historian Marco Cueto has dubbed “scientific excellence on the periphery”? See Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 37. 63. Rudolf Fricke, Frederick Oskar Giesel, chap. 4. 64. Soininen, “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine,” 44. Most likely this method is referred to in “Bereiding van cocaïne.” For a more in-depth historical analysis of the chem-

103

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 104

C U LT U R E

Thus at the same time that Java coca failed to meet the existing European standards for cocaine content, several German chemists and pharmaceutical firms were already developing ways to convert ecgonine into highquality cocaine.65 This conversion process also resulted in much higher quality and therefore safer and more effective medicinal cocaine preparations than the method for extracting the cocaine alkaloid. So when the first shipments of Java coca arrived in Europe, at least two pharmaceutical manufacturers were able to convert its ecgonine into cocaine, but in both cases production capacities were limited because of problems with scaling up the systems.66 E. Merck, the largest manufacturer, continued to use Peruvian coca until 1905, relying on the Peruvian-German firm Kitz & Co. for its supply. Yet eventually the ecgonine process would prove disastrous for the Peruvian producers, who had always focused on production levels rather than on improving quality. In 1911, when the Peruvian minister of development asked chemist Emmanuel Pozzi-Escot if the country’s coca industry could apply ecgonine-conversion methods in response to the shifting quality standards in Europe for cocaine extraction, Pozzi-Escot answered that Peru had neither the knowledge nor the technology to do this.67 With the expiration of the German patents in 1903; the ethical pharmaceutical movement calling for higher-quality materials; and the diminishing quality of leaves and raw cocaine from Peru between the 1890s and the beginning of the first decade of the new century, which according to E. Merck’s chemists resulted in a much lower quality of medicinal cocaine, the firm switched suppliers.68 Ultimately, Dutch coca planters supplied a large portion of the raw material for E. Merck’s cocaine production prior to World War I.69 Indeed, every coca manufacturer in Germany could now take advantage of the ecgonine base that was so abundant in Java coca. The rise in the fortunes of Java coca coincided with the rise of a successful cocaine industry in the Netherlands and the broadening of the scientist– planter network.70

ical discussion surrounding conversion-extraction developments during this period, see Bosman, “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek,” 55–60. 65. Brigitte Hoppe, Aus der Frühzeit der chemischen Konstitutionsforschung, 62–70. 66. Soininen, “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine,” 110–11. 67. “Transformación de la ecgonina en cocaína,” 77–78. 68. In E. Mercks’s Jahresberichte of the 1890s it becomes clear that by the mid-1890s the firm’s chemists started to complain about the quality of Peruvian raw cocaine from Kitz & Co. See Merck’s Jahresberichte, 1896–1905, in the E. Merck Corporate Archives; Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 65–83; and Hirschmüller, “E. Merck und das Kokain,” 116–32. 69. Merck’s Jahresberichte, 1905–1914, in the E. Merck Corporate Archives. 70. De Jong, “Coca,” 873; de Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 57; Steven B. Karch, A Brief History of Cocaine; Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine, 125.

104

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 105

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

The Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek (NCF): The Dutch Cocaine Industry and Javanese Coca

An important factor in the growing demand for Java coca after 1900 was the emerging Dutch cocaine industry led by one company, the Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek (NCF). In 1925 the Dutch Pharmaceutical Journal published a short piece on the NCF’s twenty-fifth anniversary, praising the company for being among the leading producers in the world despite significant foreign competition and also for being an outstanding example of modern industry in the Netherlands.71 This praise was well-deserved. Twenty-five years after its founding, the NCF was one of the leading producers within an international cocaine cartel that included German, French, British, and Russian producers, and it almost single-handedly positioned the Netherlands as one of the Europe’s leading cocaine manufacturers during the interwar years.72 This status was achieved through extensive cooperation among scientists, traders, industrialists, and planters. The founding of the NCF, on 12 March 1900, was the result of negotiations among a number of individual and institutional actors, including German salesman Georg Boldemann, German chemists Otto Eberhard and Franz Loth, the Dutch Colonial Investment Bank (Koloniale Bank), and J. van Hengst, the owner of the coca plantation L. O. Soekamadjoe. Following Boldemann’s initiative, the group established the NCF in response to the low prices paid for Java coca by the German manufacturers and the enormous profits gained by the latter for the cocaine end product. By the end of 1900 the NCF had succeeded in producing 78 kilograms of pure cocaine hydrochloride; four years later this had risen to 478 kilograms. Although this production level was quite profitable, it fell short of the NCF’s initial production plans. During the next decade the company sorted out its production problems, thus facilitating its growth into the first rank.73 First, it needed to expand production of the raw material. The Soekamadjoe plantation was able to supply only half of the agreed upon amount of coca leaves; not until 1908 would the NCF succeed in contracting with an additional major supplier of Java coca. By that time both German and Dutch demand for the relatively cheap Java coca had increased exponentially, from 63,349 kilograms in 1908 to 412,541 in 1911, and Amsterdam 71. “Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek,” 269. 72. Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V. te Amsterdam; Nationaal Archief: Cultuur-, Handel- en Industriebank; Koloniale Bank; Cultuurbank N.V., 1881–1969, nummer toegang 2.20.04, inventarisnummer 928. See also de Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 60– 62, and Bosman, “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek,” 150 and 521. 73. Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V. te Amsterdam, 12; “De Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V.,” 796–802; de Jong, “Coca,” 873; de Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 60; Bosman, The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek, 95–128.

105

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 106

C U LT U R E

developed into a major trading center for the now popular commodity.74 Demand for and trade in the South American crude cocaine product at the port of Hamburg dropped significantly, from 7,043 kilograms in 1907 to 2,417 in 1911, thereby facilitating Amsterdam’s prominence.75 This shift promoted the integration of Java coca’s distribution chain. Next, the NCF’s production quality needed to be improved. With the death of its scientific director, Loth, in 1907 and the appointment of G. H. Kramers as the new director, the company’s production process improved considerably and its production capacity increased accordingly. An extensive new factory built near the center of Amsterdam added to its capacity through its state-of-the-art production technology.76 And finally, the NCF succeeded in securing a foothold in the European market, which had been difficult because the German cocaine syndicate of E. Merck, Boehringer & Sohne, Riedel & Co., Knoll & Co., and Gehe & Co. tried to prevent the NCF’s access to it. It was through Loth’s German connections that the NCF entered into an agreement with the German wholesale drug firm of Gehe & Co, which sold raw materials for drug manufacturing. After which the syndicate granted the NCF a production quota of 400-kilograms of cocaine hydrochloride. By the start of the 1910s and despite ongoing negotiations, the syndicate refused to allow the NCF to join it, although the NCF was granted a new contract with Gehe for 800 kilograms of cocaine hydrochloride annually. Consequently, the NCF became one of the major cocaine producers in Europe.77 The success of the NCF and the readily available coca leaves from the Dutch East Indies provided incentives for other Dutch drug companies to start producing cocaine from Java coca, including the largest pharmaceutical company in the Netherlands, Brocades & Stheemann.78 In the process Java coca became a succesful colonial cash crop. The prominence of the NCF proved vital for broadening the network of scientists, planters, traders, and industrialists involved in Java coca production, and also for providing connections to the German pharmaceutical industry and research institutes. Practical and Fundamental Science in Compliance with the New Standards, 1903–14

While work on extraction methods proceeded in Europe, scientists at the Botanical Garden had stopped their research on Java coca, publishing noth74. De Jong, “Coca,” 294. See Mercks Jahresberichte, 1905–1911, in the E. Merck Corporate Archives. 75. Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V., 16. 76. Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V. te Amsterdam, 15; Bosman, “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek,” 117–22. 77. Ibid., 18; Korrespondenz Louis Merck, in the E. Merck Corporate Archives. 78. De Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 60; Tromp de Haas, “Coca-cultuur,” 302; Hans Winkler, “Über die Kultur des Kokastrauches, besonders in Java,” 74.

106

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 107

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

ing on the subject between 1890 and 1903. The expiration of the German patents and the initial success of the Dutch cocaine industry changed this. Scientific interest at Buitenzorg revived with the growing commercial and industrial interest abroad, as might be expected by its commercial orientation. Starting with the 1903 publication of an article on Java coca by the head of both the Cultuurtuin and the agricultural–chemical laboratory W. R. Tromp de Haas, a new wave of publications emanated from the Botanical Garden, mostly from a single scientist, chemist–pharmacist A. W. K. de Jong. In the interim period since 1890 the Botanical Garden itself had changed. Under the leadership of Treub it transformed into the Department of Agriculture in 1905, placing greater emphasis on the practical application of science for colonial agriculture and also science as a part of the colonial bureaucracy. De Jong, in comparison to his colleagues in the 1880s, functioned as both bureaucrat and scientist responsible for providing scientific research on Java coca to planters in order to improve the profitabilty of the crop, promoting its exploitation as part of larger efforts to increase the value of commercial agriculture in the Dutch East Indies. Thus in addition to conducting scientific research, de Jong acted as a spokesman for Java coca.79 From 1905 to 1914 he published twenty-one articles on Java coca in Teysmannia and dozens more in other journals, combining chemical– pharmaceutical research with commercial interests and placing himself at the center of a network of fellow scientists, planters, traders, and industrialists. In 1912, for example, de Jong was one of the first to suggest creating a syndicate of coca planters and a cocaine-extraction factory on the island of Java, and during the 1910s he was in contact with Louis Merck, the commercial director of the E. Merck pharmaceutical firm.80 In his position as appointed scientist at the Botanical Garden, de Jong worked exclusively on the improvement of the ecgonine-conversion method and evaluation process, researching the best ways to pick and dry the leaves in order to maintain the highest possible alkaloid quality—that is, the amount of usable cocaine alkaloid.81 In the 1880s Greshoff and his colleagues had already determined that the ways by which the leaves were picked and dried were critical for improving the alkaloid content. For example, Greshoff had concluded in 1888 that drying the leaves artificially (in the same manner as 79. Goss, The Floracrats; Moon, Technology and Ethical Idealism. 80. A. W. K. de Jong, “Een bond van Javacocaplanters,” 197, and “Het Coca-vraagstuk,” 669; “Het Cocavraagstuk” (Tijdschrift voor Nijverheid), 137–53; Korrespondenz Louis Merck. In 1914 de Jong was quite close to realizing his project of a cocaine-extraction factory, but the outbreak of World War I ruined his plans; see de Korte, Tussen patiënt en delinquent, 57. 81. A. W. K. de Jong: “De bepaling van het alcaloidgehalte der cocabladeren,” 381; “Het alkaloidgehalte van cocablad,” 124–25; “Extractie van Cocablad,” 176; “Coca en de extractie der alkaloïden”; “Java-Coca,” 233–37; “Komt in de Java coca kristalliseerbare cocaïne voor?” 416; “De extractie van het cocablad,” 451.

107

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 108

C U LT U R E

tea leaves) instead of naturally (in the sun, as was done in Latin America) resulted in much-higher-quality coca leaves.82 Between 1904 and 1913 de Jong continued this research and confirmed that artificial drying was indeed the better option for maintaining the highest alkaloid levels, also confirming earlier work that favored young leaves as having the highest alkaloid content and therefore the maximal commercial value.83 He therefore recommended selective harvesting: namely, picking the youngest leaves at the ends of branches.84 In addition to de Jong’s investigations in Buitenzorg, chemical research conducted at the Colonial Museum in Haarlem, the Netherlands, focused on improving the method for extracting cocaine and converting ecgonine into the substance. The museum was established in 1864 as the foundation of the Company of Industry (Maatschappij van Nijverheid), a cooperative enterprise of entrepreneurs and industrialists, for the collection of colonial products from agriculture, industry, and mining. By the late nineteenth century the museum was not only collecting but also providing practical knowledge and advice regarding these colonial products.85 During the first decade of the twentieth century the director of the Colonial Museum was Maurits Greshoff, the same pharmacist who in 1888 found that coca leaves contained alkaloids other than cocaine. As director he published four studies explaining the method of extraction he developed in 1888 and the improvements he had made in the ecgonine-conversion method and the evaluation process of leaves.86 Greshoff ’s work from 1888 through the early 1900s on the method of validating and extracting cocaine from coca leaves was highly regarded in the international chemical–pharmaceutical world. The method he developed is cited in the contracts between E. Merck and the Dutch company Maatschappij voor Industrieele Ondernemingen op Java for evaluating the content of the leaves.87 Up until his death in 1909 Greshoff responded regularly in the Haarlem Colonial Museum’s bulletin to questions sent by Dutch planters and manufacturers regarding Java coca.88 For example, in 1909 the bulletin published the “regulation,” a standardized procedure for determining the value of Java coca leaves based on 82. Greshoff, “Over het alcaloidgehalte van coca op Java gekweekt.” 83. A. W. K. de Jong, “Het drogen van cocabladeren,” 443. 84. A. W. K. de Jong, “De toekomst der Coca cultuur op Java,” 138, and “Java-coca,” 201, 423. 85. E. C. Jul Mohr, “Het Koloniaal Instituut,” 172–81; Arjen Taselaar, “De Nederlandse Koloniale Lobby,” 165–70. 86. Maurits Greshoff, “Waardebepaling van Java Coca,” and “Ecgonine-bepaling in Java-Coca.” 87. Dekker, “In Memorium Dr. M. Greshoff ”; Verträge zwischen Merck un die Maatschappij voor Industrieele Ondernemingen op Java (1912), in the E. Merck Corporate Archives. 88. See “Java coca,” 202–3.

108

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 109

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

the methods developed by Greshoff in 1888 and 1907.89 The high quality of cocaine extractable from Java coca was the result of ongoing research and exchanges between Greshoff and de Jong. These investigations into harvesting and processing coca leaves, as well as the work on the improvement of conversion and evaluation processes, demonstrate that both Greshoff and de Jong were well aware of the pharmaceutical industry’s growing demand for high-quality raw coca materials. One of the main reasons that E. Merck, for example, changed suppliers was the noncompliance of the Peruvians, who continued to provide crude cocaine that did not meet the increasing quality standards of the industry. According to de Jong in 1911, “[w]here the preparation of cocaine from the Peru-alkaloid takes place by a process of partition, the chance is greater that the product is contaminated through traces of other combinations [such as side-alkaloids as isatropylcocaine]. With the preparation of cocaine from Java coca the chances of contamination by using the appropriate method are impossible.”90 Thus the demand for high-quality medicinal cocaine resulted in the emphasis on high-quality raw materials by the pharmaceutical industry, which in turn motivated scientists like Greshoff and de Jong to keep improving the production methods and chemical evaluation of coca leaves. This increasing knowledge of methods and evaluation was disseminated through journals and ongoing exchanges with interested planters, traders, and manufacturers. The two centers of scientific work on coca leaves in Buitenzorg and Haarlem can be considered as, to use Bruno Latour’s term, “the knots and nodes” of a transnational network.91 In the case of Javanese coca a preexisting Dutch colonial agro-industrial network was already in place for crops like cinchona, sugar, and tea. The focus of this network changed over time, however. During the 1880s it had a strong regional basis, with the Botanical Garden as a “knot” providing exchanges among local scientists, planters, and colonial functionaries; it did not as yet have strong ties to the European pharmaceutical manufacturing centers like those in Germany, where better and/or new extraction methods were being developed. By the start of the twentieth century, however, scientists like Greshoff and de Jong were at the forefront of a transnational network and commodity chain linking these two previously independent research centers together and consequently rendering Java coca a successful colonial cash crop alongside more wellestablished colonial products like cinchona, coffee, tea, and sugar.

89. Regulatief voor het onderzoek van handelswaren in het laboratorium van het Koloniaal Museum te Haarlem, 18–19. 90. A. W. K. de Jong, “Peru-Coca,” 309. 91. Bruno Latour, Science in Action, 181.

109

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 110

C U LT U R E

Conclusion

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

The transformation process from Javanese to Java coca involved three important elements. First was the laboratory revolution in botany and chemistry during the second half of the nineteenth century, which facilitated laboratory testing of the botanical–chemical properties of coca. Java coca was itself the product of a scientifically organized plant-breeding and -selection program: it had smaller leaves, grew more quickly than other coca varieties, and, most significantly, had twice as much of the active principle as Peruvian coca (although in a different chemical form). This latter point resulted in conflict between Buitenzorg’s advocacy of its Java coca and expectations of the European pharmaceutical industry. Overcoming this dissent required a great deal of technical work to resolve the issues. As Java coca’s fortunes improved in the early twentieth century, ongoing laboratory testing of the chemical-extraction process, in concert with experimention on the methods for cultivating, picking, and drying the leaves, resulted in a new and improved coca product that met the industry’s highquality standards for pure cocaine. The second element involved was the changing landscape of the pharmaceutical industry during the last quarter of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth, particularly with its new emphasis on quality. The demise of patent-medicine manufacturers and the rise of an ethical pharmaceutical industry resulted in the increasing use of drug standards and efficient production processes, consequently dramatically changing the prospects of Java coca. By 1910 cheap Peruvian coca had lost its competitive edge because its manufacturers had never focused on quality improvement and therefore had no scientific infrastructure in place when it was needed. The changes in Java coca conformed to the increasing requirement for standardized industrial and medical products at the turn of the twentieth century. The third element involved in the transformation process and one intimately connected with the previous two was the role of the Botanical Garden of Buitenzorg as a nexus of science, trade, and commerce. The co-construction of scientific and commercial activity through the transdisciplinary working practices encouraged and coordinated by the Botanical Garden fostered the superseding of Peruvian coca by Java coca. Unlike in Peru and Bolivia, where coca cultivation was practiced on a small scale and potential networks of innovation remained fragmented, the Dutch East Indies made cash-crop innovation the cornerstone of its colonial economic policy and provided the infrastructure to support it. Planters, scientists, tradesmen, government officials, and industrialists alike cooperated and exchanged information on the cultivation and industrial processing of cash crops like Java coca. The linkage between Buitenzorg and the European pharmaceutical industry eventually fostered the environment for this work in both

110

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 111

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

regions to proceed in concert. Thus Java coca can be regarded as a new technological product that emerged from an agro-industrial network supported by a “modern” colonial-plantation economy. The historical transformation from Javanese to Java coca illustrates how the circulation and exchange of knowledge among science, commerce, industry, and the state configured what is called “colonial agro-industrialism.” Bibliography Archival Sources

E. Merck Corporate Archives, Darmstadt, Germany Nationaal Archief, Den Haag, the Netherlands Published Sources

Annals of the Royal Gardens, Peradeniya. Colombo, Sri Lanka, December 1901. “Bereiding van cocaïne.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 30 (1894): n.p. Bignon, A. “La Cocaina y sus sales.” El monitor Médico 13 (1885): 231–34. ———. “Sobre una nueva coca del norte del Perú.” Boletín de la Academia Libre de Medicina (1886): 36–37. Bosman, Hans H. “The History of the Nederlandsche Cocaïne Fabriek and its Successors as Manufacturers of Narcotic Drugs, Analysed from an International Perspective” (Ph.D. diss., Maastricht University, 2012). Burck, W. “Opmerkingen over de onder den naam van Erythroxylon coca in Nederlandsch Indië gecultiveerde gewassen.” Teysmannia 1 (1890): 385. Burhop, Carsten. “Pharmaceutical Research in Wilhelmine Germany: The Case of E. Merck.” Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, November 2008, 1–30. Church, Roy, and E. M. Tansey. Burroughs Wellcome & Co.: Knowledge, Trust, Profit and the Transformation of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, 1880–1940. Lancaster, UK: Crucible Books, 2007. Clavero, José G. El Tesoro del Perú. Lima: Imprenta de Torres Aquirre, 1896. “Cocaïne.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad (1892): 7. Contreras, Carlos, and Marcos Cueto. Historia del Perú Contemporáneo. Lima: IEP, 2007. Cook, Harold J. Matters of Exchange: Commerce, Medicine, and Science in the Dutch Golden Age. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007. Cotler, Julio. Clases, Estado y Nación en el Perú (1979). Reprint, Lima: IEP, 2009. Cunningham, Andrew, and Perry Williams, eds. The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Daniel, Pete. Breaking the Land: The Transformation of Cotton, Tobacco, and Rice Cultures since 1880. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1986.

111

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 112

C U LT U R E

Davenport-Hines, Richard. The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Social History of Drugs. London: Phoenix Press, 2004. “De Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 76 (1939): 796–802. Dekker, J. “In Memoriam: Dr. M. Greshoff.” Teysmannia 21 (1910): 1–6. ———. “In Memoriam: Dr. K. W. van Gorkum.” Teysmannia 21 (1910): 199–200. Drayton, Richard. Nature’s Government: Science, Imperial Britain, and the “Improvement” of the World. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000. “Een nieuw alcaloïde uit Java-coca.” Teysmannia 2 (1891): 511. Eijkman, J. F. Een bezoek aan ’s Lands Plantentuin. ’s Gravenhage, the Netherlands: De Gebroeders van Cleef, 1887. Emche, Stephen D., et al. “AFLP Phylogeny of 36 Erythroxylum Species: Genetic Relationships among Erythroxylum Species Inferred by AFLP Analysis.” Tropical Plant Biology 4, no. 2 (2011): 126–33. Escohotado, Antonio. Historia General de las Drogas. Madrid: Huertas, 1998. Fitzgerald, Deborah. “Beyond Tractors: The History of Technology in American Agriculture.” Technology and Culture 32 (1991): 114–26. Fox, Robert, and Anna Guagnini. Laboratories, Workshops, and Sites: Concepts and Practices of Research in Industrial Europe, 1800–1914. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Fricke, Rudolf. Frederick Oskar Giesel: Pionier der Radioaktivitätsforschung. Opfer seine Wissenschaft. Wolfenbüttel: AF Verlag, 2001. Gagliano, Joseph A. “The Popularization of Peruvian Coca.” Revista de Historia de América 59 (1964): 164–79. Gootenberg, Paul, ed. Cocaine: Global Histories. New York: Routledge, 1999. ———. Andean Cocaine: The Making of a Global Drug. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008. Goss, Andrew. The Floracrats: State-Sponsored Science and the Failure of the Enlightenment in Indonesia. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2011. Greshoff, Maurits. “Over het alcaloidgehalte van coca op Java gekweekt.” In Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1888, Bijlage II, 71– 75. Batavia, Netherlands Indies: Landsdrukkerij, 1888. ———. “Waardebepaling van Java Coca.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 13 (1905): 286–90. ———. “Ecgonine-bepaling in Java-Coca.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 32 (1907): 961–63. Grove, Richard. Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origins of Environmentalism, 1600–1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Guillaume, H. The Amazon Provinces of Peru as a Field for European Emigration. London: Wyman and Sons, 1888. 112

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 113

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

Handboek voor cultuur- en handelsondernemingen in Nederlands-Indië 18. Amsterdam: De Bussy, 1906. Heitmann, John Alfred. The Modernization of the Louisiana Sugar Industry, 1830–1910. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1987. “Het belang der chemie voor onze koloniën.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 16 (1920): 445. “Het Cocavraagstuk.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 43 (1912): 980–84. “Het Cocavraagstuk.” Tijdschrift voor Nijverheid en Landbouw in Nederlandsch-Indië 85 (1912): 137–53. Higgenson, Eduardo. “Informe sobre el comercio entre Nueva York y Peru del año 1905.” Boletín del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores 5 (1905): 186–87. Hirschmüller, Albrecht. “E. Merck und das Kokain. Zu Sigmund Freuds Kokainstudien und ihren Beziehungen zu der Darmstädter Firma.” Gesnerus 52 (1995): 116–32. Hoppe, Brigitte. Aus der Frühzeit der chemischen Konstitutionsforschung: die Tropanalkaloide Atropin und Cocain in Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft. Munich: Oldenburg Verlag, 1979. Huisman, Frank. “Van bedreiging tot bondgenoot. De transformatie van de farmaceutische industrie in Nederland, 1880–1940.” Tijdschrift voor Sociale Geschiedenis 25, no. 4 (1999): 443–78. ———. “Patiëntenbeelden in een moderniserende samenleving: Nederland, 1880–1920.” Gewina 25 (2002): 210–25. “Java coca.” Bulletin van het Koloniaal Museum te Haarlem 42 (1909): 202– 3. Jong, A. W. K. de. “De bepaling van het alcaloidgehalte der cocabladeren.” Teysmannia 16 (1905): 381–82. ———. “Het drogen van cocabladeren.” Teysmannia 16 (1905): 443–44. ———. “Het alkaloidgehalte van cocablad.” Teysmannia 17 (1906): 120– 25. ———. “Extractie van Cocablad.” Teysmannia 17 (1906): 176–87. ———. “Coca en de extractie der alkaloïden.” In Voordracht gehouden ter gelegenheid van het Koffie congres te Soerabaja op 13 december 1907. N.p., 1907. ———. “De toekomst der Coca cultuur op Java.” Teysmannia 19 (1908): 138–42. ———. “Java-Coca.” Teysmannia 19 (1908): 233–37. ———. “Komt in de Java coca kristalliseerbare cocaïne voor?” Teysmannia 19 (1908): 416–18. ———. “De extractie van het cocablad.” Teysmannia 20 (1909): 451–56. ———. “Java-coca.” Teysmannia 21 (1910): 201–5, 423–28. ———. “Peru-Coca.” Teysmannia 22 (1911): 309–12. ———. “Een bond van Javacocaplanters.” Teysmannia 23 (1912): 197–99. ———. “Het Coca-vraagstuk.” Teysmannia 23 (1912): 669–81. 113

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 114

C U LT U R E

———. “Coca.” In K.W. Van Gorkum’s Oost-indische cultures, edited by H. C. Prinsen Geerlings, 281–301. Amsterdam: De Bussy, 1919. ———. “Coca.” In De Landbouw in de Indische Archipel, edited by C. J. J. van Hall and C. van de Koppel, 866–88. ’s Gravenhage, the Netherlands: Van Hoeve, 1948. Karch, Steven B. A Brief History of Cocaine. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2006. Kemp, P. H. van der, and A. H. Berkhout. “Dr. Hasskarl’s mislukte poging tot invoering der coca-cultuur op Java: officiëele stukken, wedergegeven door de redactie.” Tijdschrift voor nijverheid en landbouw te Batavia 32 (1886): 413–58. Koningsberger, J. C. ’s Lands Plantentuin onder Melchior Treub. N.p.: Weltevreden: Albrecht & Co., 1917. Koolhaas, R. D. “Half a Century of Phytochemical Research.” In Science and Scientists in the Netherlands Indies, edited by Pieter Honig and Frans Verdoorn, 207–15. New York: Board for the Netherlands Indies, Surinam, and Curaçao, 1945. Korte, Marcel de. Tussen patiënt en delinquent. Geschiedenis van het Nederlandse drugsbeleid. Hilversum, the Netherlands: Verloren, 1995. “Kunstmatige cocaïne.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 35 (1888): n.p. Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987. Liebenau, Jonathan. Medical Science and Medical Industry: The Formation of the American Pharmaceutical Industry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987. ———, Gregory J. Higby, and Elaine C. Stroud, eds. Pill Peddlers: Essays on the History of the Pharmaceutical Industry. Madison, WI: American Institute of the History of Pharmacy, 1990. Lisson, Carlos. Breves apuntes sobre la sociología del Perú en 1886. Lima: Imprenta y Librerías de Benito Gil, 1887. Maat, Harro. Science Cultivating Practice: A History of Agricultural Science in the Netherlands and Its Colonies, 1863–1986. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Martín Albornoz, Mariano. Breves apuntes sobre las regiones amazónicas. Lima: Imp. del Progreso, 1885. Merck, Willy. “Ueber Cocain” (Ph.D. diss., University of Kiel, 1886). Mohr, E. C. Jul. “Het Koloniaal Instituut.” Teysmannia (1911): 172–81. Moon, Suzanne. Technology and Ethical Idealism: A History of Development in the Netherlands East Indies. Leiden: CNWS Publications, 2007. Musto, David. “International Traffic in Coca through the Early 20th Century.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 49 (1998): 145–56. Nagelvoort, J. B. “Folia Coca. Een phytochemisch overzicht.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 38, nos. 2–4 (1901): n.p. “Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 10 (1925): 269. 114

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 115

VAN DER HOOGTE and PIETERSK|KJavanese Coca

Nederlandsche Cocaïnefabriek N.V. te Amsterdam: Vanaf hare oprichting op 12 Maart 1900 tot medio 1946 (unpublished report). Amsterdam, 1946. “Over Coca-bladen.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 41 (1904): 315–17. Paz Soldan, Carlos Enrique. Un Memorandum sobre la situación actual de la coca peruana. Lima: Ediciones de “La Reforma Medicina,” 1936. Pieters, Toine. Historische trajecten in de farmacie; Medicijnen tussen confectie en maatwerk. Hilversum, the Netherlands: Uitgeverij Verloren, 2004. Plowman, Timothy. “The Identification of Coca (Erythroxylum Species): 1860–1910.” Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 84 (1982): 329–53. ———. “The Ethnobotany of Coca (Erythroxylum spp., Erythroxylaceae).” Advances in Economic Botany 1 (1984): 62–111. Pozzi-Escot, Emmanuel. “Importancia industrial de los alcaloides.” Boletín del Ministerio de Fomento 4 (1911): 30–34. Reens, Emma. La Coca de Java: Monographie historique, botanique, chimique et pharmacologique. Paris: Lucien Delume, 1919. ———. “De Java-coca.” Pharmaceutisch Weekblad 13 (1920): 341–48. Regulatief voor het onderzoek van handelswaren in het laboratorium van het Koloniaal Museum te Haarlem, 18–19. Haarlem: Koloniaal Museum, 1909. Rijnberg, Theo F. ’s Lands Plantentuin, Buitenzorg 1817–1992. Enschede: Johanna Oskamp, 1992. Romano, Ruggiero. “Coca buena, coca mala? Su razón histórica en el caso peruano.” In La coca andina: Visión indígena de una planta satanizada, ed. Joan Boldo i Climent, 297–352. Mexico City: Instituto Indigenista InterAmericano, 1986. Schiebinger, Londa. Plants and Empire: Colonial Bioprospecting in the Atlantic World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004. ———, and Claudia Swan, eds. Colonial Botany: Science, Commerce, and Politics in the Early Modern World. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005. Schoor, Wim van der. “Biologie en landbouw. F.A.F.C. Went en de Indische proefstations.” Gewina 17 (1994): 145–61. Sibinga Mulder, J. “’s Lands Plantentuin 1817–15 April 1942. Ideële wetenschap en praktijk.” Landbouwkundig Tijdschrift 54, no. 664 (1942): 301– 19. Sleen, G. van der. “Over Java-coca.” De Indische Mercuur, 25 February 1908, 1–18. Slinn, Judy. “Research and Development in the UK Pharmaceutical Industry from the Nineteenth Century to the 1960s.” In Drugs and Narcotics in History, edited by Roy Porter and Mikulas Teich, 168–86. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Snelders, H. A. M. De geschiedenis van de scheikunde in Nederland. Van alchemie tot chemie en chemische industrie rond 1900. Delft: Delftse Universitaire Pers, 1993. 115

06_vanderhoogte 90–116 :03_49.3dobraszczyk 568–

T E C H N O L O G Y

JANUARY 2013 VOL. 54

A N D

1/16/13

7:16 PM

Page 116

C U LT U R E

———. Wetenschap en Intuïtie. Het Duits romantisch-speculatief natuuronderzoek rond 1800. Baarn: Ambo, 1994. Soininen, Jyri. “Industrial Geographies of Cocaine” (Master’s thesis, University of Helsinki, 2008). Spillane, Joseph. Cocaine: From Medical Marvel to Modern Menace in the United States, 1884–1920. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2000. Swann, John P. Academic Scientists and the Pharmaceutical Industry: Cooperative Research in Twentieth-Century America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988. Taselaar, Arjen. “De Nederlandse Koloniale Lobby: Ondernemers en de Indische Politiek, 1914–1940” (Ph.D. diss., University of Leiden, 1998). “Transformación de la ecgonina en cocaína.” Boletín del Ministerio de Fomento 9 (1911): 77–78. Travis, Anthony S., Harm G. Schröter, Ernst Homburg, and Peter J. T. Morris, eds. Determinants in the Evolution of the European Chemical Industry, 1900–1939: New Technologies, Political Frameworks, Markets, and Companies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998. Tromp de Haas, W. R. “Coca-cultuur.” Teysmannia 1 (1903): 283a. Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1886. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, 1887. Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1887, 32. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, 1888. Verslag omtrent den staat van ’s Lands Plantentuin te Buitenzorg en de daarbij behoorende inrichtingen, gedurende het jaar 1888. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij 1889. Wahrig, Bettina. “‘Fabelhafte Dinge’: Arzneimittelnarrative zu Coca und Cocain im 19. Jahrhundert.” Ber. Wissenschaftsgesch 32 (2009): 1–20. Walger, Theodor. Die Coca: Ihre Geschichte, Geographische Verbreitung und Wirtschaftliche Bedeutung. Berlin: E.S. Mittler & Sohn, 1917. Wimmer, Wolfgang. “Wir haben fast immer was Neues”: Gesundheitswesen und Innovationen der Pharma-Industrie in Deutschland, 1880–1935. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt, 1994. Winkler, Hans. “Über die Kultur des Kokastrauches, besonders in Java.” Der Tropenpflanzer. Zeitschrift für Tropische Landwirtschaft 10 (1906): 69– 81. Young, James Harvey. The Toadstool Millionaires: A Social History of Patent Medicines in America before Federal Regulation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961.

116