Abstract

This timely, well‐written book illuminates an aspect of Brazilian science that has long been neglected, for two major reasons. The first is that it is only in the past two decades that the scientific past of Latin America, including Brazil, seemed to merit systematic academic investigation, and only with this change have scholars discovered, or rediscovered, several important, but forgotten, developments, such as the one Julyan Peard analyzes in this study. The second reason is that, although there is a substantial literature on late nineteenth‐ to early twentieth‐century colonial science and medicine—which is considered almost synonymous with tropical medicine—none of it treats Brazil or any of the other Latin American countries because, even though they fall within the tropical zone, they were formally independent nations from the early 1800s onward.Peard rejects this adherence to the old criterion for defining “tropical.” Drawing on a respectable collection of both primary and secondary sources, she tells the story of the Escola Tropicalista Bahiana , which was founded before the revolution in bacteriological knowledge and the great European colonial expansion. The idea for the school originated, Peard says, with “a group of nineteenth‐century doctors in Brazil who, in attempting to adapt Western medicine to more fully engage with the problems of their tropical country, sought novel answers to the age‐old question of whether diseases of warm climates were distinct from those of temperate Europe. In their search, they used the tools of Western medicine to confront European ideas about the fatalism of the tropics and its people, and to argue in favor of Brazilian expertise.”The text is organized into five chapters, whose titles clearly describe both the structure of the narrative and Peard's main points, as well as part of her conclusions: “The Escola Tropicalista Bahiana: A Creative Response in Adversity”; “The Politics of Disease”; “Race, Climate, Medicine: Framing Tropical Disorders”; “Physicians and Women in Bahia”; and “Moving into Mainstream.” In her introduction Peard presents a useful discussion of the earlier literature on her topic, pointing out her contribution to several relevant fields. Throughout, the text is structured to highlight the tension between the Tropicalistas and European science: “although they [the Tropicalistas] resisted aspects of European cultural authority that harped on Brazilian, and Latin American, inferiority, they wanted to gain the mantle of legitimacy that they believed only European science, as the leader in universal science, could bestow on them.” Peard shows, chapter by chapter, the Tropicalistas' sometimes conscious, sometimes intuitive strategies to build up an innovative scientific field, a project that entailed issues of national identity and the regional response to the centralized imperial authority of Rio de Janeiro. Almost half the volume is devoted to supplementary material: three useful appendixes, notes to all the chapters, a list of primary sources, the bibliography, and a well‐elaborated index—all of which testify to the quality of both Peard's research and her book as a whole.It is important to stress here that Peard relies on what one could call the “new” Brazilian history and sociology of science, particularly in the fields of medicine and public health. Despite its vigorous growth, both quantitatively and qualitatively, this historiography still remains more or less confined to Latin America, its wider dissemination impeded by language barriers. In using and commenting on the bibliography of this new historiography, Peard respects the local intellectual production while helping to enrich the traditional set of references. Nevertheless, and although I warmly recommend the book, I regret that she did not fully incorporate the conclusions reached by this recent historiography, preferring instead to present essentially the same picture drawn in previous works, a picture based on the view that “in the few instances of research work being carried out in Brazil before 1900 such work was sporadic, isolated … or incapable of being self‐sustaining.”