Healing the Herds: Disease, Livestock Economies, and the Globalization of Veterinary Medicine

Chapter 4 Policing Epizootics

Chapter 4 Policing Epizootics Legislation and Administration during Outbreaks of Cattle Plague in Eighteenth-Century Northern Germany as Continuous Crisis Management Dominik฀Hünniger EPIZOOTICS,฀ESPECIALLY฀of฀cattle฀plague,฀raged฀through฀Europe฀during ฀the฀eighteenth฀century฀with฀three฀peaks฀in฀incidence.฀The฀first฀occurred฀ from฀1711฀to฀1717,฀the฀second฀from฀1745฀to฀1757,฀and฀the฀third฀from฀1769฀to฀ 1786.1 ฀Their฀devastating฀impact฀on฀the฀economy฀and฀society฀can฀hardly฀be฀ overrated฀in฀the฀light฀of฀estimated฀mortality฀rates฀of฀between฀70฀and฀90฀percent .฀However,฀until฀recently฀the฀historiography฀on฀veterinary฀medicine฀in฀ Germany฀has฀concentrated฀on฀the฀development฀of฀veterinary฀services฀and฀ has฀been฀written฀by฀practicing฀veterinarians.2 ฀Unlike฀the฀diverse฀and฀original฀ research฀on฀livestock฀diseases฀in฀modern฀Africa,3 ฀studies฀on฀early฀modern฀ Germany฀are฀rare,฀and฀hardly฀any฀attempt฀has฀been฀made฀to฀reveal฀the฀effect฀ various฀diseases฀have฀had฀on฀the฀everyday฀life฀of฀rural฀populations฀and฀the฀ enormous฀challenge฀epizootics฀posed฀to฀early฀modern฀administrations.4 ฀ This฀chapter฀aims฀to฀shed฀new฀light฀on฀some฀aspects฀of฀disease฀control ฀by฀focusing฀on฀changes฀and฀continuities฀in฀official legislation฀in฀times฀ of฀cattle฀plague฀during฀the฀eighteenth฀century.฀This฀disease฀has฀become฀ synonymous฀with฀rinderpest,฀but฀because฀we฀do฀not฀know฀exactly฀what฀ the฀disease฀was฀and฀retrospective฀diagnoses฀are฀historically฀suspect,฀I฀stick฀ Policing Epizootics฀฀฀|฀77 to฀the฀contemporary฀language฀that฀described฀these฀epizootics฀as฀“horned฀ cattle฀plague”฀(Hornvieh-Seuche).฀The฀main฀body฀of฀sources฀is฀sixty-eight฀ so-called฀police฀ordinances฀(Policeyordnungen)฀that฀were฀published฀from฀ 1682฀to฀1798฀in฀the฀Duchies฀of฀Schleswig฀and฀Holstein,฀then฀under฀the฀Danish ฀crown.฀Similar฀ordinances฀can฀be฀found฀in฀many฀other฀territories฀of฀ the฀Holy฀Roman฀Empire฀(in฀fact,฀in฀most฀parts฀of฀Europe),฀and฀many฀historians ฀of฀veterinary฀medicine฀have฀examined฀these฀documents.฀However,฀ the฀majority฀of฀veterinarians฀who฀have฀analyzed฀these฀ordinances฀have฀assumed ฀that฀they฀reflect฀reliable฀facts฀about฀actual฀events.฀Here,฀I฀am฀arguing ฀for฀a฀more฀careful฀reading฀of฀these฀sources฀because฀these฀ordinances฀ reveal฀only฀government฀intentions฀as฀how฀to฀deal฀with฀an฀epidemic฀at฀a฀ legislative฀ level.฀ In฀ practice,฀ the฀ reactions฀ of฀ local฀ administrations฀ were฀ shaped฀by฀a฀less฀rigorous฀approach฀to฀disease฀control,฀as฀Jutta฀Nowosadtko฀ has฀recently฀pointed฀out.5 ฀ Reflecting฀upon฀recent฀research฀on฀police฀ordinances฀and฀state-formation฀ processes,฀which฀stresses฀the฀contested฀nature฀of฀early฀modern฀legislation฀and฀ administration,฀I฀will฀ask฀how฀different฀groups฀of฀actors฀shaped฀these฀ordinances ฀in฀a฀communicative฀process.฀As฀a฀short฀summary฀of฀this฀research,฀ I฀want฀to฀highlight฀three฀aspects฀that฀are฀particularly฀important฀for฀my฀ work.฀First,฀administrative฀action฀was฀always฀concerned฀with฀local฀circumstances ฀and฀the฀special฀needs฀of฀dominant฀social฀groups.฀Laws฀and฀regulations ฀had฀to฀be฀adjusted฀to฀meet฀the฀demands฀of฀everyday฀life.฀Regulations฀ may฀have฀been฀formulated฀as฀general฀and฀universal,฀but฀people฀assumed฀ that฀these฀rules฀would฀be฀open฀to฀adjustment฀in฀special฀circumstances฀and฀ individual฀cases.฀Hence,฀law฀and฀practice฀were฀part฀of฀a฀circular฀process;฀ this฀fact฀is฀not฀so฀much฀interesting฀in฀terms฀of฀the฀difference฀between฀legislative ฀claims฀and฀actual฀(non-)฀compliance฀as฀it฀is฀in฀the฀way฀in฀which฀ different฀social฀groups฀negotiated฀these฀regulations฀and฀for฀what฀reasons.6 ฀ Second,฀state฀formation฀in฀the฀early฀modern฀period฀was฀not฀a฀process฀of฀ simple,฀straightforward฀modernization฀but฀rather฀a฀continuous฀one฀with฀ many฀ruptures฀and฀idiosyncrasies,฀a฀process฀in฀which฀authorities฀and฀subjects ,฀center฀and฀periphery,฀court฀and฀province฀had฀to฀negotiate฀the฀extent฀ and฀limitations฀of฀power.7 ฀Power฀in฀early฀modern฀times฀was฀directed฀at฀ acceptance;฀and฀territorial฀and฀local฀authorities,฀as฀well฀as฀other฀corporate฀ bodies฀and฀certain฀individuals,฀collaborated฀closely.฀Generally,฀all฀parties฀ involved฀aimed฀for฀consensus฀but฀did฀not฀avoid฀conflicts฀when฀their฀livelihoods ฀or฀interests฀were฀at฀stake.8 ฀ Finally,฀early฀modern฀political฀language฀was฀a฀“language฀of฀legitimisation ”9 ฀that฀justified฀its฀aims฀according฀to฀generally฀accepted฀values.฀In฀this฀ respect,฀although฀negotiation฀was฀almost฀always฀at฀play,฀it฀rarely฀happened฀ 78฀฀|฀฀฀Dominik฀Hünniger between฀equals,฀and฀power฀was,฀of฀course,฀distributed฀unevenly.฀However,฀ individuals฀were฀always฀involved฀in฀acts฀of฀persuasion฀when฀they฀wanted฀ to฀exercise฀political฀power.฀According฀to฀Michael฀Braddick,฀“These฀acts฀of฀ persuasion฀ are฀ best฀ observed฀ in฀ micro-historical฀ contexts—the฀ face-toface ฀situations฀in฀which฀claims฀to฀political฀power฀are฀actually฀asserted฀and฀ tested.฀.฀.฀.฀In฀face-to-face฀situations฀the฀claim฀to฀political฀power฀is...