This paper discusses the research of British naturalists in China during the period between the Opium War and the collapse of the Qing dynasty (1839–1911). China was defeated in the Opium War and forced to open treaty ports for trade with the Westerners. The foreign powers, particularly Britain, imposed upon the Qing government treaties, concession leases, favourable trade conditions, legal privileges and so on to reduce its political autonomy. In the shadow of the informal empire, not only did the British have more freedom to travel in China, first at the treaty ports and later in the interior, but they successively established diplomatic, commercial and missionary institutions in dozens of Chinese cities. The most important of them – the British Consular Service, the Chinese Maritime Customs and the Protestant missionary organizations – provided the talent and infrastructure for natural historical research and became networks for scientific information. The research into China's natural history epitomized the characteristics of British research on China in general: it engaged in collecting and circulating an ever-increasing amount of information and aimed at producing ‘factual’ and ‘useful’ knowledge about China. The paper modifies current literature on scientific imperialism, which has dealt primarily with the colonial context, by examining the role of nineteenth-century British imperial science in the context of informal empire.

The conditions surrounding the re-publication of Isaac Newton's treatise on the biblical books of Daniel and Revelation, under the editorship of Sir William Whitla in 1922, serve as a vehicle for examining how the writings of eminent scientists can be mobilized in the cause of local culture wars. After some reflections on the idea of the ‘geography of reading’, the paper turns to an analysis of Whitla's use of Newton's reputation as an apologetic device, and his staging of Newton's writings on eschatology in order to shore up Protestant values during the early days of the Northern Ireland state. This case study of the textual tactics of Whitla, the distinguished Ulster medical professor, Methodist layman and member of Parliament, draws attention to the significance of location in understanding the historical relations between science and religion.

Francis Bacon's position on the existence of void and its nature has been mostly studied with regard to his views on the atom. This approach is undoubtedly right, but it disregards further topics related to Bacon's account of void, namely the world system and the transmutation of bodies. Consequently, a more comprehensive study of Bacon's view on vacuum seems desirable where all the contexts are taken into account. To address this desideratum, the present paper examines Bacon's different views on vacuum drawing attention to the various contexts of the discussion. It also gives an evaluation of the arguments put forward in support of his positions. The first section presents a reconstruction of Bacon's consecutive positions and the reasons for his changes of mind. The second section lists the experimental facts traditionally cited in debates about vacuum and Bacon's interpretation of these. The final section evaluates the role that these experimental facts played in Bacon's arguments. As a result, it is shown that Bacon fits entirely into the general pattern of the early seventeenth century. Empirical arguments by themselves had little value for solving the question of the void; it was also necessary to have a formerly established theory.

This essay examines some aspects of the early history of the vitalism/mechanism controversies by examining the work of Nehemiah Grew (1641–1712) in relation to that of Henry More (1614–87), Francis Glisson (1599–1677) and the more mechanistically inclined members of the Royal Society. I compliment and critically comment on John Henry's exploration of active principles in pre-Newtonian mechanist thought. The postulation of ‘active matter’ can be seen as an important support for the new experimental philosophy, but it has theological drawbacks, allowing for a self-sufficient nature relatively independent of God. Grew resists this view and, like Henry More, advocates the need for a vital principle to direct material nature towards its ends. I illustrate the connection Grew sees between teleology and vitalism and the paper closes with Pierre Bayle's reaction to Grew's attempt to support his religious commitments by appeal to vital principles.

So many Arts, hath the Divine Wisdom put together; only

for the hull and tackle, of a sensible and Thinking creature.

Nehemiah Grew, Cosmologia