ABSTRACT
Sometimes what we don’t know, and what we choose not to know more about, tells us as much about our society or past societies as the study of knowledge itself. So argued historian of science Robert Proctor in his book Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance. Proctor and his colleagues described incidents in history where doubt is deliberately used to create confusion and scepticism to refute or discredit scientific evidence or avoid regulation, such as witnessed in the debates surrounding climate change, genetically modified food or the link between tobacco and lung cancer. Proctor also highlighted areas where knowledge is not sought for cultural reasons or is subsequently forgotten or overlooked. In this chapter, I will argue that lacunae in knowledge can arise for many reasons, both deliberately and inadvertently. I believe the latter can happen when objects, substances, processes or inventions already assimilated into a culture take on a use or agency for which they were not intended and so escape recognition and monitoring. Synthetic dyes and their use in industrial food production are a good
example of this. Most western countries now tightly regulate the chemical colourings that food and drink manufacturers use, either through a list of permitted dyes or a list of prohibited ones. However, many countries have only introduced regulations in recent decades, more than a century after their first appearance in our food, and countries continue to disagree as to which synthetic dyes should be permitted and which prohibited.1 Why did it take so long for society to investigate and regulate the use of new and, in many cases, dangerous chemicals used in food production? During the second half of the nineteenth century, a period when food scares
were reported almost daily in the press, hundreds of aniline and other coaltar-based dyes began to be used in food and drink products with no oversight and little widespread concern, particularly from the scientific community. Synthetic dyes were one of a kaleidoscope of new substances, including drugs, flavourings, sweeteners and perfumes, synthesised by European chemists from coal-tar waste from the mid-1850s. The Victorian media greeted these new chemical substances as wonders of science and their discovery led to the
formation of chemical and pharmaceutical companies such as BASF, Bayer and Ciba-Geigy. Historians have identified synthetic dyes as a valuable site for debating the rising power of industrial chemistry and the transition from pure scientific research to industrial practice (Garfield, 2001; Haber, 1969; Beer, 1958; 1959; Homburg et al., 1998; Travis, 1983; 1993). However, few historians have examined an area of dye consumption that impacted everyone during this period and whose repercussions are still felt today – the use of chemical dyes in food. Manufacturers successfully – and silently – introduced synthetic colourings
into food at a time when social reformers, politicians and the media were wringing their hands about the dangers of food adulteration. On the surface, it seems surprising that the introduction of completely new chemical substances, including aniline dyes which later proved to be highly poisonous, was ignored during a period when food legislation was being continually updated and when public analysts were being paid to identify harmful and fraudulently applied food additives. Examining the introduction of these new chemicals into Victorian food sheds light on the public perception of science at the time, the struggle for status and authority among those arbitrating the food supply, and the ways in which food processes and practices come to be seen as legitimate or fraudulent.
