This introduction to a special issue of BJHS concerned with intermedial approaches to the history of the public culture of science (those that pay attention to the forms of different science media and how they relate to each other) also stands as an argument for such approaches. It amplifies a trend within humanities and social-science approaches to its subject of studying the interactions between science, media and publics as complex historical phenomena – in comparison with evaluative research approaches that seek to make science communication more effective. It argues for the virtues of going beyond most existing scholarship in the field by considering many media together. Drawing on the work of media studies scholars Irina Rajewsky and Klaus Bruhn Jensen, it introduces working definitions of intermediality. It then explores historically the genealogies of intermediality, which emerges as an entanglement of changing disciplines, technological change and media practice. Two brief sections take the example of museum display in this intermedial context with the aim of showing first that museum practice was already intermedial before it was considered to be ‘one of the media’. It then concludes by showing how, and in what circumstances, the mediatization of museums came to seem necessary.

Finding the right balance between education and entertainment in science communication has always been a challenge. This essay argues that this balance has often been framed in terms of the correct proportion and use of animation and live-action footage in popular-science media. Clarifying the assumptions behind a century of concerns about animation and science, this historical case study examines the advisory board’s complaints about animation in the Bell System Science Series, which aired in the United States between 1956 and 1964. AT&T interrupted the series mid-stream by switching the creative team from Frank Capra and his production company to Owen Crump at Warner Bros. Studio. Capra’s use of animation in the series featured prominently in this decision. The historical record – as well as Capra’s and Crump’s different aesthetic choices about animation – tells us much about the board’s objections and how they were resolved in production. This essay examines the differences between the two parts of the series to uncover a course correction steered primarily by the scientific advisory board, which reveals a sometimes-fraught relationship between live-action footage and animation in science education that persists even today.

This article examines the contributions of Bert Bolin, the first chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), to the collective understanding of the panel’s nature, operations and results, as well as his efforts to safeguard the credibility of the IPCC process in the face of criticism. Based on the scholarship on expertise and its relationship with the political process, I argue that Bolin’s contribution to that process can be summarized in three points. First, he acted as a mediator between producers of climate change knowledge and its users, in this case governments and corporations. Second, he selected and emphasized some of the information provided by the IPCC and used it to advocate for immediate action to tackle climate change. Third, he played a major role in legitimizing the IPCC as the best possible assessment organization, especially through boundary work. Additionally, it is suggested that Bolin’s role in the advisory process was not static but changed within an evolving political and social context. Through this case study, I aim to contribute to the scholarship that examines how environmental problems are defined and brought into the political arena, and the role of experts in this complex process.

The Avicennan text De congelatione et conglutinatione lapidum had a great influence on the alchemical thought of the thirteenth century. This Latin text disputed both the veracity of alchemy and the possibility of alchemical transmutation by arguing that art is inferior to nature and that the alchemists cannot manipulate a metal because its true characteristics are hidden from our senses; thus an alchemist cannot change something which is unknown to him. Newman’s pioneer studies examined the diffusion and impact of the first Avicennan argument on medieval alchemy and he shed light on the art-versus-nature debate. This paper has a twofold aim: on the one hand it aims to further Newman’s study by focusing on the second Avicennan argument, which is closely related to the problem of substantial form, and on the other hand it aims to show how the aforesaid problem paved the way for the emergence of corpuscularianism, which flourished during the early modern period. In this regard, it will become clear that the historiographical case of alchemy and its problem of substantial form can serve as an exegetical tool for ‘bridging’ the Middle Ages and the early modern period with respect to the relation between Aristotelianism and corpuscularianism.

The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva, Switzerland, is renowned for operating the world’s largest particle accelerator and is often regarded as a model of high-profile international collaboration. Less well known, however, is a key episode from the late 1950s, when CERN clashed with the research priorities of similar organizations. The issue centred on a CERN-sponsored study group on controlled thermonuclear fusion, which brought together scientists from CERN member states, as well as representatives from the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), the European Nuclear Energy Agency (ENEA) and the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). While their meetings succeeded in creating an international network for exchanging reports and coordinating projects to avoid duplication, the initiative failed to establish joint fusion research programmes in Europe. This article explores the reasons behind this outcome to provide insights into intergovernmental power dynamics and scientific competition and how these two factors favoured the creation of a new fusion research institution in the UK, the Culham Laboratory. In doing so, the article contributes to a deeper understanding of the role of science in European integration, while also highlighting that CERN’s involvement in application-oriented research remains an underexplored aspect of its history.