Chinese medicine, with its millennia-long tradition of utilizing herbs for therapeutic purposes, has historically relied on the study of Ben-cao (本草學) to support theoretical frameworks and clinical practices. Ben-cao studies share certain parallels with pharmacognosy, a field within modern Western medicine that emerged in the 19th century. However, as pharmacology rose to prominence in the early 20th century, the traditional knowledge of Ben-cao encountered significant challenges. Pharmacognosy, on occasion, was employed as a tool to “scientize” traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). Among these efforts, the extraction of ephedrine from the medicinal herb Ma Huang (麻黃) in the 1920s serves as a pivotal example. This case not only illustrates the complex interplay of scientific methodologies in the development of modern TCM but also highlights the professional rivalry between Western-trained pharmacologist Ko-Hui Chen and Japanese pharmacognosy researcher Seiko Kubota.
This paper examines their work on ephedrine extraction during the late 1920s, uncovering the intersections and compromises between Western and Chinese medical knowledge systems in the process of discovery. Furthermore, it explores Kubota’s subsequent integration of Ben-cao principles with pharmacognosy, shedding light on his efforts to synthesize traditional and modern approaches. These developments offer valuable insights into the scientific modernization of TCM in the 1930s and the pragmatic compromises that shaped the creation of a “new” traditional Chinese medicine.

Key words: Ben-chao studies, Pharmacognosy, Pharmacology, Ephedrine

This paper examines the interactions between Western botany and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the 19th century. Both in ancient Greek and Chinese cultures, rhubarb has maintained its acknowledged reputation as a potent medicinal agent. Over the centuries, rhubarb has been repeatedly prescribed for a diverse range of ailments, including digestive disorders, fevers and infections. From the perspective of European naturalists, rhubarb held such a prominent position that Friedrich August Flückiger (1828-94) and Daniel Hanbury (1825-75) asserted in ''Pharmacographia'' (1874), ‘‘No competent observer, as far as we know, has ever ascertained as an eye-witness the species of Rheum which affords the commercial rhubarb.’’ Several renowned experts, such as Edward Balfour (1813-89), Franklin Bache (1792-1864), and Jonathan Pereira (1804-53), expressed significant interest in this herb. In addition to identifying various Rheum species, one of their shared objectives was to domesticate them in British or American territories, given that the finest quality rhubarb was primarily cultivated in India and China. This paper attempts to scrutinize the exchange of botanical and pharmacological knowledge among Chinese, European and American scholars during the 19th century, and to explore their academic connections with TCM texts, particularly those that claimed some of their information was derived from works such as ''Bencao Gangmu'' (Compendium of Materia Medica, 1596).

This paper examines science, medicine and technology exchanges on the goldfields of nineteenth-century Aotearoa New Zealand. It focuses on both the adaptation and development of new goldfields technologies by Cantonese miners and entrepreneurs, such as the Californian pump and waterworks. In doing so, it highlights the role of Chinese merchant Choie Sew Hoy (徐肇開; 1836–1901) in developing a new mining technology, backed by European and Chinese capital, and staffed using Chinese and European engineers. As well, it considers exchanges of different medical systems on the goldfields among Chinese, Māori and Europeans, and Chinese technology exchanges in market gardening.
Keywords: science, technology and medicine exchanges. Chinese, Aotearoa-New Zealand