183 2022 SPECIAL ISSUE UDK 616.932:94(497.4)"18" Katarina Keber PhD in History, Senior Research Fellow, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Milko Kos Historical Institute, Novi trg 2, SI–1000 Ljubljana Email: katarina.keber@zrc-sazu.si Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2586-4983 Carniola’s Defense Mechanism for Protection against the First Cholera Epidemic in Europe* ABSTRACT The Habsburg authority fought against the epidemic of cholera, which firstly reached Europe at the beginning of the 30ies of the 19th century, with identical means as they did in the 18th century against plague. With a system of sanitary cordons, they initially protected the state borders, and after the occurrence of the disease within the monarchy, borders of separate provinces as well. From the example of a sanitary cordon on the Carniolan-Croatian border, which was established for the protection against the epidemic in the Hungarian part of the state, the system of controlled pas- sages trough sanitary cordons (rastel) and quarantines is evident, and causes that lead to general further discontinu- ation of closing borders as a means of defence against cholera. KEY WORDS history of medicine, epidemics, Cholera, sanitary cordon, Carniola, 19th century IZVLEČEK KRANJSKI OBRAMBNI MEHANIZEM ZA ZAŠČITO PRED PRVO EPIDEMIJO KOLERE V EVROPI Proti epidemiji kolere, ki je Evropo prvič dosegla v začetku tridesetih let 19. stoletja, se je habsburška oblast borila z enakimi sredstvi kot v 18. stoletju proti kugi. S sistemom zdravstvenih kordonov so najprej zaščitili državne meje, po pojavu bolezni znotraj monarhije pa tudi meje posameznih dežel. Iz primera zdravstvenega kordona na kranj- sko-hrvaški meji, ki je bil vzpostavljen za zaščito pred epidemijo v ogrskem delu države, je razviden sistem rastelov in karanten ter vzroki, ki so vodili k vsesplošnemu nadaljnjemu opuščanju zapiranja meja kot sredstvu za obrambo pred kolero. KLJUČNE BESEDE kolera, epidemije, zdravstveni kordon, Kranjska, 19. stoletje * The contribution is a translation of the publication in the review Kronika 53, 2005, no. 3, pp. 351–364. 184 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 In the 1830s, Europe experienced what is known as the first Asiatic cholera pandemic. The spread of the disease from Asia to Europe was most likely facilitated by intense trade contacts and increasing traffic between the British Empire and India or, in other words, by Britain’s expansion to the east. Chol- era spread from India following two main routes: through Persia and along the river Ural northward to Russia, and then to Europe from Mecca through the ports of Istanbul, Turkey, and Alexandria, Egypt. The disease struck Europe for the first time during its second pandemic1 between 1826 and 1837, a period when most of the world is generally considered to have had the first real experience with cholera. From the Black Sea, the disease reached Europe from two directions: through Poland, after it broke out in east- ern Galicia in 1830, and through the Danubian prin- cipalities.2 By 1831, it had engulfed Sankt Peterburg, Berlin, and Hamburg, and appeared in Finland and England. In the Habsburg Monarchy, apart from Vi- enna, the disease also affected Galicia, Moravia, Sile- sia, Transylvania, Upper and Lower Austria, Styria, as well as Bohemian and especially Hungarian parts of the monarchy. In a little over than six years, chol- era swept across the old continent and the Americas.3 State policy When cholera broke out in the Habsburg Mon- archy in 1831, the state responded with a two-phased approach. The first phase of defense was of a strictly preventive nature, and it aimed to protect the state borders against an unknown disease spreading from the neighboring countries by establishing a system of cordons sanitaires along the monarchy’s eastern border.4 The second phase also had a curative char- acter, and it was introduced once cholera had bro- ken through the border protection mechanisms and spread into the monarchy’s interior. By isolating in- fected areas, the state sought to minimize the spread of the disease to other parts of the country and pro- vide for the internal protection of the provinces by appointing provisional emergency health authorities with almost unlimited discretionary powers, such as provincial health commissions, tasked with organ- izing aid and medical treatment for patients in the 1 Robert Pollitzer broke down the spreads of cholera into sev- en pandemics or, rather, epidemics of global proportions. The second pandemic encompassed the epidemics in England, Ireland, France with Paris, Quebec, Montreal, New York, and Philadelphia in 1832; Spain, Portugal, the Caribbean, and Latin America in 1833; Italy in 1835, and the Mediterranean in the following years–Carniola was hit by the first cholera epidemic in 1836. 2 Krebs, Die geographische Verbreitung der Cholera, p. 8. 3 The Cambridge World History of Human Disease, pp. 645–648. 4 Cordon sanitaire (also sanitary cordon) is a line established around an area to prevent the spread of a contagious disease by restricting passage into or out of the area. infected areas. The first phase of defense against the cholera epidemic will be presented on the example of setting up the cordon sanitaire on the Carniolan- Croatian border. The plague and cordons sanitaires The entire defense system of the Habsburg Mon- archy built on regulations and practices that had been developed in the struggle against plague epidemics over the previous centuries.5 In Carniola, too, cor- dons sanitaires and quarantine were a tried and tested protective measure against the plague, with a known example of border closure imposed in the Karawanks between 1713 and 1716 to prevent the plague from spreading from Carinthia.6 The protective measures against the first cholera epidemic in the Habsburg Monarchy rested on the Pest-Reglement, Maria The- resa’s patent of January 2nd, 1770, or the General Health Law on Fighting the Plague.7 Before that, a number of plague orders (Infections-Ordnung) were in place, the first issued by Emperor Ferdinand I in 1551. The first part of the Pest-Reglement governs the organization of the medical service across the mon- archy and the second provides for a special organiza- tion of the medical service in the Military Frontier.8 The latter gradually changed from what was initially a strictly military formation into a health-prevention institution whose specific organizational forms and con- tumacy (quarantine) facilities protected not only Austria but all of Europe against the plague and other contagious diseases and epizootics which constantly spread from the Turkish sultanate.9 The cordon sanitaire in the Military Frontier became a permanent institution in 1728. The anti-plague system proved to be highly effective, given that in the second half of the eight- eenth century the plague passed through the cordon no more than five times, only once posing a serious threat to the monarchy.10 5 Peter Baldwin bases the decision for individual measures in different European countries on the previous experience with prevention, understanding the transmission of the disease, geographical conditions, and the economy. During the first epidemic of cholera in 1831, strict quarantine was typical- ly imposed by autocratic countries in Eastern Europe, e.g., Russia, Prussia, and Austria. Western Europe introduced a slightly milder form of the quarantine policy in combination with other measures, except in major ports, such as Hamburg and Marseille (Brunton, Dealing with disease, pp. 194–195). 6 Koblar, O človeški kugi na Kranjskem, p. 45. See also Žontar, Zapora proti kugi. 7 Borisov, Od ranocelništva, p. 90; Kobal, O koleri na Kranj- skem, p. 74. The term Pest-Reglement is cited from Kobal, whereas Grmek writes about Normativum sanitatis. 8 SI AS 1079, Zbirka normalij, t. u. 4, Maria Theresa’s patent of January 2nd, 1770; Borisov, Od ranocelništva, p. 78. 9 Borisov, Od ranocelništva, p. 73. 10 Borisov, Od ranocelništva, p. 74; Grmek, Sanitarni kordon Vojne krajine, pp. 457–458. 185 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 The cordon sanitaire, set up in 1831 to ensure protection against cholera, was organized in accord- ance with the provisions of the Pest-Reglement from 1770 and following the example of its counterpart in the Military Frontier. The cordon remained in force until October 14th, 1831, when the emperor replaced it with regulations applicable to epidemic diseases.11 All extraordinary measures, such as the border clo- sure or the cordon sanitaire and quarantine stations, were abolished and cholera started to be treated as any other epidemic disease pursuant to the norm of 1806.12 This document no longer stipulated special state defense measures and in its ten articles merely set out general preventive and curative measures for every individual to abide by in the time of contagion. The norm also reassured that the disease was not new and had already occurred under similar weather conditions and circumstances, but that fairer weather and God’s Will should take it away (Die Krankheit ist nicht neu, sondern wir sahen selbe bey einer ähnliche lange anhaltenden Witterung und unter gleichen Um- ständen immer entstehen. Wir dürfen auch, da die Jah- reszeit nun so weit vorgerückt und bereit besseres Wetter eingetreten ist, es mit Zuversicht erwarten, dass Gott diese Krankheit bald gänzlich von uns hinwegnehmen werde).13 The authorities instructed the population to pursue a moderate and healthy way of life, and above all to keep their homes and surroundings clean, they prescribed procedures to be followed in case of ill- ness and advised people to keep up the good spirit and strong faith in God.14 The emperor described the conditions that ne- cessitated a change in understanding the nature of the disease and thus a change in the defense strat- egy against cholera in an imperial letter to Count Mitrowski, Head of the United Court Chancellery.15 11 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 738: proclamation of the Illyrian gubernium of November 17th, 1831; SI AS 14, Gu- bernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2413. 12 Laibacher Zeitung, Amts-Blatt, December 1st, 1831, no. 144, pp. 1221–1222; SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 739: Un- terricht in Bezug des Benehmens bei epidemisch ansteckenden Krankheiten von 27. Februar 1806. 13 Laibacher Zeitung, Amts-Blatt, December 1st, 1831, no. 144, pp. 1221–1222. 14 Ibid. 15 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2413. The English translation reads: “When the cholera epidemic threatened to break into my lands, the nature, the origin, and the way in which the disease spread raised doubt. Caution, wisdom, and concern for the wellbeing of my sub- jects set in motion the tried and tested measures to protect against the most dangerous contagious disease. The provi- sions of the Pest-Reglement (italics by the translator) thus came into force. Yet the failure to comply with them allowed the disease to spread unhindered. Institutions and measures laid bare the shortcomings that proved even more harmful than the disease-induced calamity itself. The closures posed a particularly serious threat to the health of cordoned-off com- munities, with the locally stationed troops more frequently contracting and spreading the disease against which they were supposed to protect. The fear of the threat of infection, In the letter, he stated several reasons for the regula- tory change, the most important being that the de- fense mechanisms under the Pest-Reglement proved to be completely ineffective in tackling cholera epidemics. In mid-October 1831, after the disease had spread widely across the monarchy, the authori- ties realized that the established system of cordons sanitaires and the network of quarantine institutions were not enough to fight off the disease. Moreover, through the construction of necessary infrastruc- ture and the promotion of employment, this defense mechanism not only drained the treasury, but it also hindered interprovincial traffic and trade, and thus largely contributed to economic stagnation and civil discontent. The latter, further fueled by the flawed public health system and the general distrust toward the authorities, escalated into unrest several times. The norm of February 27th, 1806, therefore primar- ily aimed at reassuring the population and reminding them to remain god-fearing and refrain from chang- ing their daily habits. The statement that the disease was not something new and unknown was also in- tended to have a heartening effect. People were en- couraged to believe that the government was coping with the situation and that the disease was, after all, not so dangerous as it originally appeared. The first protective measure introduced by Em- peror Franz I in 1830 was the military cordon on the border with Russia, initially considered a suc- cess for having temporarily contained the spread of the disease.16 As the first outbreak of cholera within the borders of the Habsburg Monarchy occurred in eastern Galicia in the spring of 1831, the emperor sought to protect western Galicia and other parts of the state by setting up two military cordons sanitaires on the Vistula and the San, which failed to stop the disease from spreading. The third and the fourth cor- dons, which protected the northern and southwest- ern part of Hungary—the right bank of the Dan- ube—from Galicia also proved inefficient after the entire Hungary quickly became the second focus of the outbreak in the monarchy.17 When the first case of cholera in Hungary was recorded on June 13th, 1830, the existing two military cordons on the San to its discharge into the Vistula and along the bor- ders of Moravia and Silesia protecting the Austrian provinces against the infected Galicia were added a chain of military cordons to safeguard the prov- which resulted in all these measures, robbed many patients of the urgent treatment and care, and it also stood as an obstacle to mutual assistance; not least, these measures also affected trade and traffic, as well as crafts—they wrecked individuals’ prosperity and robbed thousands of their income...” 16 Illyrisches Blatt, October 1st, 1831, no. 40, p. 157, „Über die Aufhebung der Sanitäts-Cordone gegen die Cholera“; Lai- bacher Zeitung, June 7th, 1831, no. 45, p. 461. 17 Illyrisches Blatt, October 1st, 1831, no. 40, p. 157, „Über die Aufhebung der Sanitäts-Cordone gegen die Cholera“. 186 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 inces against the spread of cholera from Hungary.18 When cholera erupted in northern Hungarian coun- ties, the emperor ordered to set up a cordon sanitaire and incorporate it into the established military cor- don toward Galicia, starting at the San’s discharge into the Vistula and continuing to the Hungarian border. To this cordon, he then also ordered a rapid incorporation of other existing cordons (Zoll-Linie) toward Hungary, lined along the provincial borders of Moravia, Lower Austria, Inner Austria, Carniola, and the Austrian Littoral. These cordons were trans- formed into cordons sanitaires manned by military units and provided with health institutions.19 The construction of the defense system was therefore ex- panded from the Moravian border with Galicia to include the Lower Austrian, Inner Austrian, Carni- olan, and Austrian-Littoral borders with Hungary.20 Hungary in the grip of fear and uncertainty Within the Habsburg Monarchy itself, Carniola faced the most severe and imminent cholera threat from Hungary. The epidemic broke out in June 1831 in Tisza-Ujlak, a town situated upstream of the Tisa in the administrative county of Ugocsa, from where it was spread by salt rafters.21 By mid-July, the disease had reached the Danube and infected nearly all parts of Hungary by the beginning of September.22 The epidemic peaked between June 13th and September 27th, when 2,269 Hungarian districts and towns re- corded 218,183 infections and 87,391 deaths.23 The city of Pest alone registered 1,648 deaths of about 3,700 infections between July and September.24 In 1831/1832, Hungary with a population of 8,750,000 registered 435,330 persons infected with cholera or 5% of the Hungarian population, 188,000 of which died. Mortality was 43%.25 The United Court Chancellery kept the guber- nium in Ljubljana informed about the developments in Hungary. Two major concerns raised by the Hun- garian government were the shortage of physicians and the lack of knowledge about the nature of the disease, which was typical of most infected countries and regions. A major challenge facing physicians apart from large distances and poor traffic connec- tions was the overall simple-mindedness. Ordinarily, the rural population placed more trust in the clergy’s advice and felt that physicians and the government 18 Ibid., pp. 157–159. 19 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, no. 16142. 20 Laibacher Zeitung, July 19th, 1831, no. 57, pp. 226–227; Birk- ner, Die bedrohte Stadt, p. 22. 21 Eckstein, Die epidemische Cholera, p. 13. 22 Jankovich, Die epidemische Cholera, p. 101. 23 Jovin, Epidemija kolere, p. 26. 24 Eckstein, Die epidemische Cholera, p. 26. 25 Lukács, Az 1831–1832 évi magyarországi kolerajárvány, p 131 (I would like to thank Eva Lengyel for the translation). were hiding the truth about the disease. The sense of powerlessness and fear among the Hungarian popu- lation during the epidemic was, for example, mani- fested in the peasant uprising, the so-called kolera felkeles, which was attended by no less than 45,000 people.26 On July 17th, 1831, riots also erupted in Pest, af- ter students organized a mass demonstration against the temporary suspension of studies due to the epi- demic and gathered at Danube bridge. The student demonstration was sparked by rumors that once Pest had cut its ties with Buda on the right bank of the Danube and closed the bridge, cholera was elimi- nated from the city and that another disease was af- fecting its population. The students demanded health passes to return home. After the authorities refused to meet their demand, they set out to cross the bridge and at that point were joined by a crowd of busybod- ies and idlers. Eventually, the authorities permitted them to pass and reopened the bridge between Pest and Buda. However, while the students cleared the area peacefully, the rest of the crowd went on a ram- page, breaking windows on public and private build- ings, plundering several taverns, and tearing down the quarantine facility. To establish law and order, the city authorities requested the assistance from the army, which dispersed the crowd, killing seven, leav- ing several wounded and detaining about two hun- dred.27 Part of the Carniolan public—excluding most of the population, of course—learned about the cholera epidemic in Hungary from the newspapers Laibacher Zeitung and Illyrisches Blatt. Their articles described the course of the epidemic, informed about the grow- ing number of infections and deaths, and reported on the search for an effective remedy. Whereas Illyrisches Blatt focused on publishing problem-oriented and educational articles on cholera, the readers of Lai- bacher Zeitung were provided with aggregate data on infections and deaths for the majority of affected countries and major cities, gubernial circulars, proc- lamations of the provincial health commission, and official imperial letters. The cluster of articles, titled Letters from Pest (Briefe aus Pesth), portrays the at- mosphere of fear and uncertainty that took hold of the streets of Pest. People bought excessive supplies of medicines and concoctions of all kinds, with chol- era and the cure for it becoming the central topic as much of rumors on the street as of exchanges and debates in theaters, coffeeshops, wine bars, and beer- houses (Auf allen Strassen, im Theater, in allen Kaffeh-, Wein- und Bierhäusern, wurde nur über zwei Dinge abgehandelt; das erste war die Cholera selbst, und das zweite die Präservative; ein Jeder hatte andere Recepte, 26 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2371. 27 Laibacher Zeitung, August 2nd, 1831, no. 61, pp. 241. 187 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 und ein Jeder glaubte im Besitz des Besten zu seyn…). There was talk about individual death cases and a purportedly staggering number of deaths among the predominantly poor strata. Georg von Klepetz described the overall psychosis as the culmination point of the greatest fear (Kulminations-Punkt der höchsten Angst).28 The cordon sanitaire on the Carniolan-Croatian border ... the disease is on our doorstep. Once it started to spread in Hungary, our beloved Emperor was quick to find a way to also protect Carniolans and Carinthians from this misfortune; hence the strong military presence on the Croatian border, with soldiers denying passage to anyone who has not been placed under contumacy for twenty days like during the plague, to make absolutely sure that the disease will not reach our land...29 In 1831, Carniola’s anti-cholera defense system was, as already stated, part of broad-range domes- tic defense measures to protect the Austrian prov- inces against cholera spreading from Hungary. The existing system of toll stations and border cordons (Zoll Cordons Linie) along the Hungarian border was transformed into cordons sanitaires with a reinforced military presence. The Inner Austrian cordon line, for example, was further fortified with four addi- tional battalions. The Court War Council (Hofkriegs- rath) imposed on the commanding generals in re- spective provinces that the army must keep a vigilant eye on the entire border line, ensure the continuity of the cordon, and appoint a special commander to this end. The provincial estates were obliged to take part in providing the army with logistical support, which they did, for example, with the construction of military guardhouses.30 On the Carniolan-Croatian border, the authorities envisaged to man the cordon sanitaire with the battalion already stationed there under the command of Seldenhofen, serving as a security cordon against robbers and bandits in the district of Novo Mesto.31 Initially, the measures introduced by the Vien- nese Central Court Commission for Health in the first half of July 1831 did not impose a total closure of traffic between Illyria and Hungary or, rather, be- 28 Illyrisches Blatt, October 8th, 1831, no. 41, pp. 163–164, „Aus Pesth“; Illyrisches Blatt, October 22nd, 1831, no. 43, pp. 169– 172, „Neuere Notizen über die Cholera“; Illyrisches Blatt, Oc- tober 29th, 1831, no. 44, pp. 173–174, „Neuere Notizen über die Cholera“. 29 Potočnik, Potrebno poduzhenje sa kmeta, in the address. See Studen, Prva slovenska knjižica o obrambi pred kolero, pp. 183–184. 30 Guardhouses or ‘čardaki’ (Czartaguen, Tscartaken) stood on tall wooden pillars a few kilometers apart, with guards pa- trolling between them. In: Borisov, Od ranocelništva, p. 81. 31 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, nos. 16560, 16561. tween Carniola and Croatia, and the Littoral. Bor- der toll offices (Gränzzollamt) in Jesenice na Do- lenjskem, Metlika, and Sv. Matija (Gornji Rukavac), the only points of authorized entrance from Croa- tia, were at first only tasked with cleaning cattle and smoking letters.32 Special mention was made of Sv. Matija, where the Istrian (Pazin) district sent its dis- trict commissioner. Namely, the tollhouse there was tasked with smoking letters sent from Rijeka and from the now already infected areas, such as Banat and Timisoara.33 The organization of cordons sanitaires in the monarchy required collaboration of the military and civil authorities. The military authorities appointed the cordon commander, to whom all guards were subordinated (Grenzaussichtsposten). An equal sway in decision-making was granted to district commis- sioners and local authorities.34 The Carniolan cordon was a result of the cooperation between district and customs authorities. Because the establishment and the operation of the entire border defense system re- quired a sizeable crew, the authorities employed the personnel from the existing system of border cus- toms and tobacco trade supervisors (Gränzzoll- und Tabak gefälls Aufsichts Postirungen), answerable to the Cameral Indirect Tax Administration.35 The border control crew was thus composed of 209 so-called ‘income supervisors’36 (Gefällsaufseher) and border riflemen (Gränzjager), as well as 307 soldiers from the border cordon,37 who had already been assigned to border customs and special tobacco tax collectors. Most ‘income supervisors’ and border guards were retired soldiers.38 32 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, no. 16034. 33 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, no. 16033. 34 Rannegger, Die Cholera in der Steiermark, pp. 74–75. 35 Cameral-Gefällenverwaltung commenced its operations in 1830 and was renamed k.k. Vereinigte Cameral-Gefällen- Verwaltung in 1831. Falling under its authority were, among others, the Offices of Border Customs and Salt Tax or Pro- vis. Commerzial-Gränz-Zoll und Salz-Aufschlags-Aemter at Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Metlika, each employing five officials (a tax collector, a controller, a scribe, an apprentice, and a guard). Alois Seitz was the tax collector at Jesenice and Leopold Gapp at Metlika. Auxiliary offices for border customs, salt tax, and the Hungarian thirtieth (Gränz-Zoll- Salz-Aufschlags und zugleich ungarische Dreyssigst-Subsidi- alämter) were administered by tax collectors with the assis- tance of a local guard and further lined along the border with Hungary or, rather, Croatia in Kostanjevica, Vinica, Osilnica, Radovica, Gabrje, Luža, Pobrežje, Griblje, Poljane ob Kolpi, Trava, Babno Polje, and Kermačina (Schematismus, pp. 49–51; Vilfan, Pravna zgodovina, pp. 375). 36 Or financial guards, as referred to in Granda, Bosanski ropar- ji, p. 174. 37 In 1831, two military border cordon departments (k.k. Mili- tär-Gränz-Cordons-Abtheilung) operated as special military bodies with their seats in Ljubljana and Novo Mesto. Sche- matismus, p. 52. 38 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, no. 16034. 188 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 The section of the cordon sanitaire crossing the seigniory of Snežnik (SI AS 14, Reg. VIII, f. 36 (35/Chol2), no. 609). 189 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 It was essential to exert control over the entire stretch of the border between Jesenice na Dolen- jskem and Rijeka (the Hungarian Littoral), including its hardly accessible and passable sections. 516 men were envisaged to perform this task, most of whom were, as mentioned, retired soldiers. Yet there was a growing consensus that it was physically impossible to carry out effective control, even for members of the regular army. Keeping constant guard also signified that only half of the crew were actively engaged at a time. Despite these reservations, the activities con- tinued. A deputation of three district commissioners visited Kostanjevica, Metlika, and (Ilirska) Bistrica to start with the implementation of the prescribed measures in collaboration with border customs offi- cials and the local authorities, after inspecting the en- tire border. The district commissioners were assigned special officials (Gefällsbeamte) who possessed an in- timate knowledge of the local terrain and conditions and deployed income supervisors. To facilitate con- trol of the border between Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Rijeka, the Cameral Indirect Tax Administration divided it into four sections, which were placed under the responsibility of the district commissioners. The first section, running from Jesenice na Dolenjskem to Luže pri Metliki, was supervised by the consump- tion tax commissioner (Verzehrungssteuer) Donatio from Krško; the second border section between Luže and Kostel was placed under the supervision of the adjunct tobacco inspector39 Joseph Walmisberg from Novo Mesto; the third section, running from Kos- tel to Babno Polje, fell under the responsibility of a tollhouse official Fleischmann from Babno Polje; and the fourth section, ending in Rijeka, was placed under the jurisdiction of Pober, an official from the tollhouse at Sv. Matija. This last section, mostly run- ning through the Pazin district, was extended all the way to the coast, as Istria had no customs supervision (Zollaufsicht) in place. The tollhouses at Radovica, Kermačina, and Gaberje were closed.40 An important stretch of the cordon sanitaire ran through the forested and hilly area of Snežnik, char- acterized by hardly negotiable terrain, remoteness from transport or passable roads, poor administration by the Snežnik seigniory, and the overall lack of ad- equate control.41 This area may be considered to have provided the most ‘favorable’ cordon section for ille- gal border crossings. Another indirect indication of boosting surveillance activities in this section is found in a contract on supplying construction and firewood to guardhouses in the Snežnik area, concluded be- tween the District Office Postoj na and the Snežnik 39 Taback Gefällen Inspectorat Adjunkten. 40 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 35/14, no. 16034. 41 See Kačičnik Gabrič, O kmečkih dolgovih nekoliko drugače. seigniory.42 The document ensured free wood supplies from Snežnik’s forests for the construction of guard- houses along the cordon and for accommodating the needs of its sixty-three military posts at Babno Polje on the one hand and the use of land on the other. In exchange, after the cordon was dissolved, the sei- gniory was granted the right to retain the wood, af- ter it had been processed at public expense and used for the construction of guardhouses.43 The provincial health commission lauded the Snežnik seigniory’s gesture as ‘patriotic’ and published it in the newspa- per Laibacher Zeitung, calling for more such actions to support the state in the face of ‘difficult and costly times’ (Die provinzial-Sanitäts- Commission findet sich verpflichtet, diese patriotische uneigennutzige Handlung mit dem lebhaftesten Wunsche zur öffentlichen Kenntniss zu bringen, dass sie in dem gegenwartigen drangvollen Zeitpunkte, wo die Staatsverwaltung mit unermessli- chen Auslagen für die Sanitäts-Anstalten in Anspruch genommen wird, eine reichliche Nachahmung finden möge).44 Joseph Rudesch, the owner of the Ribnica seigniory, responded to the appeal by donating wood for the purposes of the cordon sanitaire to construct fifteen guardhouses45 and the Auersperg seignory of Poljane with its seat in Predgrad contributed materi- als for the construction of guardhouses in the cordon section passing through the seigniory.46 From Carniola, the cordon sanitaire continued westward along the border between the Austrian Lit- toral and the Hungarian Littoral all the way to Volo- sko on the eastern Istrian coast. Whereas initially the land was protected against the Kvarner islands, pre- ventive measures were subsequently also introduced there by also setting up a special health commission on the island of Krk under the jurisdiction of the Pa- zin district office and the central health magistrate in Trieste. About two hundred troops were deployed to the islands. Ships were only allowed to dock at the port of Trieste, which was placed under quarantine. The army was also deployed to Istrian towns, includ- ing Piran and Koper. The defense against cholera continued from Volosko toward the sea along the eastern and western Istrian coasts leading up to Tri- este, and it was executed with ships circling respec- tive designated areas.47 At the behest of the United Court Chancellery and in agreement with the Military Command in Zagreb as well as the provincial commissions in Graz and Trieste, the Illyrian Provincial Health Commis- sion dissolved the Carniolan cordon on September 42 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol 2), no. 609. 43 Ibid. 44 Laibacher Zeitung, August 23rd, 1831, no. 67, p. 265. 45 Laibacher Zeitung, October 11th, 1831, no. 81. 46 Laibacher Zeitung, September 6th, 1831, no. 71, p. 238. 47 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 421. 190 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 26th, 1831. At the same time, the cordons in Styria and the Littoral were also terminated.48 Thenceforth, Carniola was safeguarded from cholera by the rein- forced Croatian cordon sanitaire, which ran along the Drava and the Ilova and thus primarily served to protect Croatia against cholera spreading from Hungary and Slavonia. All restriction on the Carn- iolan-Croatian border were lifted, and life returned to normal. Traffic was governed by the existing cus- toms and thirtieth laws, the police decrees on border crossing, and health norms that continued to require a health certificate before crossing the border.49 Illegal cordon crossings: an example of Jožef Petelin Of particular concern were smugglers passing the cordon illegally and undermining the effective- ness of anti-cholera defense. The district office of Ljubljana alerted the local authorities to the prob- lem and requested their cooperation in searching and apprehending undocumented foreigners.50 The Car- niolan authorities implemented the rules with a fair degree of consistency and some places in the conti- nental part of the province also established a system of guardhouses verifying foreigners’ passports, as is, among other things, also evident from the case of Jožef Petelin. The guards stopped Petelin at Vrhnika on the night of August 15th and 16th, 1831. Because the last entry in his passport was made on October 1st, 1830, for a journey from Idrija to Rijeka, the guards suspected that Petelin had crossed the cordon sanitaire illegally on his return from Rijeka. Because in the meantime, he worked for the stonemason Franc Josta in Ljubljana, the local authorities of Bis- tra near Vrhnika requested the Ljubljana magistrate to verify Petelin’s ‘alibi.’51 The authorities used the cordon sanitaire to seal the territories of Carniola and Carinthia as much as possible against the spread of the disease from Hun- gary and determine the border crossing points to ensure the most urgent and strictly supervised move- ments of people and goods. Cordon crossings were authorized exclusively at officially designated points, constructed for this purpose. Any other attempt at passing the cordon was considered an offence. The emperor expanded to cholera the definition of plague-related offences laid down in the Penal Code. The public was informed about the prohibition of cordon crossings and sanctions against perpetrators by priests from the pulpit.52 48 Laibacher Zeitung, Amts-Blatt October 13th, 1831, no. 123, p. 1047. 49 Laibacher Zeitung, September 27th, 1831, no. 77, p. 309. 50 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 270. 51 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 254. 52 Gesetze und Verordnungen, court decree of August 27th, 1831, no. 2525. Violations of measures against contagious diseas- es and appropriate penalties were stipulated in Em- peror Franz I’s patent of May 21, 1805.53 Pursuant to this document, in a district that disregarded an im- minent threat of contagious disease, one was found guilty of a serious offence if their actions deliberate- ly or incidentally caused the disease to spread. The most serious offences included unauthorized cordon crossing, quarantine evasion, dereliction of profes- sional duty by employees of defense institutions, and concealment of danger. An unauthorized cordon crossing was defined as an act committed by a person from a quarantined or cordoned-off area who crossed the cordon by land via unauthorized roads or by sea via unauthorized ports; crossing the cordon without notifying the competent authorities; entering the province illegally from an area suspected of infection and stating a falsified place of origin on continuing the journey; avoiding the main routes with the assistance of guides; and using forged documents or documents issued in another person’s name.54 Another punishable offence was falsifying health or quarantine passes, which served as authen- tic instruments55 confirming that a person had come from an uninfected area or completed the quarantine period and therefore did not pose any health risk. Guards were instructed to shoot at anyone cross- ing the cordon illegally and ignoring their warn- ings.56 Committing an illegal cordon crossing was punishable with five to ten years of rigorous impris- onment, and a willful intent or repetitive infringe- ment warranted the extension of the prison sentence for up to twenty years. The sentence was reduced for a cordon crossing that resulted from negligence and caused no harm.57 Violations of quarantine included any failure to undergo the complete quarantine period; establish- ing contact and socializing with healthy persons prior to the completing the quarantine period and without due supervision; transporting people and goods without the necessary health certificates and passes; giving refuge to people and goods without health certificates or authorization issued by the local authorities in areas near the cordon; hiding or concealing objects that were normally subject to cleaning; and finally, any unconscionable and hence potentially hazardous practices committed by quar- antine officials and hired aids.58 53 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 147: Franz I’s patent of May 21st, 1805. Laibacher Zeitung, September 15th, 1831, no. 74, p. 909. 54 Ibid. 55 Sanitäts- und Contumaz- Pass—health border pass. The terms Gesundheitspass, Gesundheitscertificat, and Gesundheits-Zeug- niss stand for a health certificate as well. Gesetze und Verord- nungen, court decree of July 26th, 1831, no. 2522. 56 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 147. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 191 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 Also subject to punishment was any dereliction of professional duty by employees in defense insti- tutions: an official’s failure to forward notifications and reports; a physician receiving bribery or accept- ing gifts for the work already paid; an official, tasked with supervising people and goods, allowing these entrance into the province via unauthorized roads or via authorized roads without undergoing the manda- tory quarantine, or releasing people from quarantine before the completion of the period prescribed; any official who issued health certificates disregarding the rules and any official or physician who failed to place himself under quarantine after being exposed to the possibility of infection in performing his work. Offences committed for the sake of seeking profits were punishable by rigorous imprisonment of ten to twenty years and ordinary offences by a prison sen- tence of five to ten years. Punishment for concealing offences was a prison sentence of one to five years and for especially serious circumstances of bribery rigorous imprisonment of five to ten years.59 In case of a major, life-threatening increase in violations of protective measures against a conta- gious disease, the system of summary judgements, or Standrecht, was provisionally enforced as a predeces- sor of the modern extraordinary criminal law ensur- ing a more stringent punitive policy. Due to the high likelihood of offences being committed in terms of unauthorized cordon crossing and avoiding quaran- tine, the punishment under this law was death by ex- ecution. The entry into force and the expiry of sum- mary judgements were to be officially announced.60 Thus, the United Court Chancellery issued a decree officially announcing October 1st, 1831, as the date of expiry of summary judgements in all provinces of the monarchy with cordons in place and as the date of the reintroduction of penal provisions under the applicable criminal law.61 The system of rastels62 and quarantines ... All clothes worn, and all goods shall be tidied and cleaned so as not to become sources of infection...63 The first two official cordon crossing points—or rastels—opened on August 1st, 1831, at Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Metlika.64 Due to construction de- lay, the opening date for the third rastel at Brod na Kolpi was pushed to August 15th.65 The selection of Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Metlika seemed reason- 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. 61 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2262. 62 Regulated cordon passages where trade was not prohibited. 63 Potočnik, Potrebno poduzhenje sa kmeta, in the address. 64 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 122; Kobal, O koleri na Kranjskem, p. 78. 65 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fols. 122, 314. able because they were situated on the border, adja- cent to the main road connections between Carniola and Croatia or, rather, Hungary. Jesenice na Dolen- jskem stood on the trade and post road to Zagreb, which ran from Ljubljana through Zidani Most and Novo Mesto to Bregana. The road winding through Metlika was the main trade and post route, starting in Novo Mesto.66 An early opening of both rastels was of crucial importance, after the border closure with Hungary hindered the traffic on the border with Croatia and the Hungarian Littoral. To miti- gate the obstruction of traffic during the construc- tion of the rastels, the authorities opened provisional cordon crossing points to enable major shipments of wheat and cattle to enter Carniola.67 The essential task of rastels was to submit every cross-border exchange of people, goods, and objects to quarantine in the name of protecting the common good (Sicherheit des öffentlichen Wohls). Smooth traf- fic flow at Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Metlika was only ensured for the transport of ‘non-toxic’ goods, which were exempt from quarantine and could be immediately taken to the other side of the border. The definition of ‘toxic’ was laid down in Article 24 of Maria Theresa’s patent of January 2nd, 1770. The list containing 238 types of goods, ranging from crops, food products, and medicines to raw materi- als and a variety of handicrafts was also published in Laibacher Zeitung.68 The Joint Court Chancellery in Vienna urged that only the most essential trade take place at the rastels and that other business activities be limited to prevent the spread of cholera through them.69 The predominant trade at both rastels was in wheat and salt, both exempt from quarantine, and cattle, which was ‘cleaned’ by being submerged neck- deep in water. Trade days were carefully specified, and they took place on Mondays and Thursdays at Jesenice and Metlika, and on Mondays and Fridays at Brod na Kolpi. After examination, the rastel in- spection service ordered that the wheat shipped on the Sava from Croatia to Jesenice na Dolenjskem be transferred to the waiting empty vessels, which then continued the journey upstream into Carniola’s interior. Cattlemen were also changed at the border crossing.70 Apart from facilitating trade, the rastels also had a social function by connecting the population from both sides of the border, which could not cross the cordon at the time. At certain hours (between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. and between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.), people could converse, but only from a safe 66 Holz, Razvoj cestnega omrežja, p. 26. 67 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 122. 68 Laibacher Zeitung, August 4th, 1831, no. 62, pp. 245–246. 69 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2326. 70 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fols. 122, 312, 314. 192 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 distance to prevent contagion. All activities at the rastels could only take place in daylight, from sunrise to sunset.71 Another type of preventive institutions on the border were quarantine complexes,72 which were built adjacent to the rastels. When a rastel conducted traffic control, combined with trade supervision and restriction, the quarantine facilities took in all people and goods whose passage was declined at the rastel on suspicion of originating from cholera-infected areas if they failed to present proof to the contrary. Quarantine requirements applied to all persons com- ing from infected or suspicious areas, as well as those not carrying health certificates. Quarantine was also imposed on ‘toxic’ goods and miscellaneous objects (Contumazbehandlung von Personen, Waaren und Ef- fecten). ‘Toxic’ goods, such as feathers, horsehair, bris- tle, flax, hemp, rawhides, fur, leather, linen, ropes, and cotton,73 were cleaned in quarantine. A special ex- ample was sheep wool which, although not listed as hazardous, had to be aired up to twenty days before being released from quarantine.74 At the time of major threat, the mandatory quar- antine period lasted forty days and was gradually reduced.75 On September 26th, 1831, the Illyrian Provincial Health Commission announced the re- duction of quarantine on cordons toward Hungary and Galicia from twenty to ten days.76 On October 10th, the emperor decreed quarantine to be reduced to five days across the entire monarchy, except the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia and the Littoral.77 For the lack of suitable premises, the quarantine facilities at Jesenice na Dolenjskem and Metlika had to be built anew. In doing so, the authorities were faced with many problems, especially the tight fourteen-day deadline for constructing the quaran- tine facilities.78 The construction of the quarantine facility at Jesenice was a matter of extreme urgency (Der Bau der Kontumaz-Anstalt von Jessenitz ist von der äussersten Dringlichkeit), the Ljubljana magistrate 71 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fols. 122, 312. 72 The term contumacy (Contumac, Contumazanstallt) signifies a sanitary measure to prevent the spread of a contagious dis- ease. The word quarantine derives from the Italian term quar- anta, meaning forty, because it initially lasted forty days. As a protective protocol of separating and restricting the move- ment of travelers from infected areas, and subjecting them to medical observation, quarantine is part of the system of medical measures to prevent the spread of contagious diseas- es. Quarantine was first organized in 1375 in Dubrovnik. 73 Kobal, O koleri na Kranjskem. 74 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), nos. 795, 1661, 2177. 75 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2177. 76 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 599. 77 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2413; Laibacher Zeitung, October 18th, 1831, no. 83, p. 338. 78 Laibacher Zeitung, August 4th, 1831, no. 62, p. 246. informed the district office of Ljubljana.79 Besides, apart from the shortage of construction wood on site, the authorities also had to tackle the lack of com- petent craftsmen or workers in the area and had to search for them elsewhere.80 Carpenters were there- fore hired in Ljubljana and its surroundings. As a subcontractor, the master carpenter Košir managed to find thirty carpenters in twenty-four hours, but only half of them ultimately took on work. The rea- sons most stated for refusing to take part in the con- struction of quarantine facilities was their illness, the illness of their wife and children, their wife’s preg- nancy, farm work, shortage of suitable clothing, and work contracts already concluded. Given the high percentage of refusals, this type of work was clearly not popular among craftsmen. The Ljubljana magis- trate helped Košir rent boats to ship all the necessary construction wood, tools, and hired workforce—car- penters, joiners, locksmiths, and potters—to Jesenice na Dolenjskem downstream the Sava River.81 As is evident from the inventory for the quarantine facili- ties at Jesenice, about forty persons could undergo the forty-day quarantine at a time, provided with the basic sleeping and hygiene necessities. The quar- 79 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 249. 80 Laibacher Zeitung, August 4th, 1831, no. 62, p. 246. 81 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fols. 246, 247, 249. Announcement (SI ZAL LJU 489, f. 348, fol. 200). 193 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 antine facilities were equipped with pallets, tables, stools and benches, clothes hangers, candle holders, as well as spittoons, bedpans, washbasins, water jugs, pallet covers, towels, pillows, and blankets.82 The entire procedure of ‘cleaning’ people and goods at rastel and quarantine facilities was free. However, because rastels’ employees initially charged these services and apparently intended to continue with this practice, the health authorities notified the public via circulars and the press that all activities performed at rastels and quarantine facilities were free of charge. They prohibited the collection of fees and demanded that the money already collected be returned. To reach both the employees and the pub- lic, the circulars were hung at the entrances to rastels and quarantine facilities, in offices, common areas for employees, cabins, and warehouses. For inform- ing the population at large, the circulars were also published in the provincial, Slovenian language.83 The rastel and the quarantine facility at Metlika An insight into the organization of cordon cross- ing points or the entire rastel and quarantine complex 82 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fol. 602. 83 SI ZAL LJU 489, fasc. 348, fols. 196, 200; Laibacher Zeitung, August 9th, 1831, no. 63, pp. 737–738. is offered by a plan that has been preserved for both institutions at Metlika.84 The rastel and the quaran- tine facility were built on the left bank of the border river Kolpa, adjacent to the bridge. The buildings of both institutions were, for the most part, lined along both sides of the Karlovac trade road, which ran through the center of the complex and was closed at the rastel with a double barrier. The quarantine facili- ty employed eight persons: the director Joseph Sterg- er, the physician Ignaz Lashan, the priest Andreas Tschebashegg, the scribe Alois Pauer, the guardians of goods Martin Lovich and Jochan Horlitschegg, as well as servants tasked with cleaning goods, Wenzl Kottek and Joseph Zollner.85 Viewed from the direction of Croatia or, rather, on entering Carniola after crossing the bridge on the Kolpa, the rastel ’s enclosed area stood on the right side. The rastel was divided into three parts. Three quarters of its total surface were dominated by an area surrounded by thick willow fencing, which served to house the cattle shipped from Croatia. The remaining area was occupied by two large, en- 84 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (Chol 2), no. 586: Situations Plan des Emplacements der Contumac Gebäude an der Kulp-Brücke bey Möttling. 85 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (Chol 2), no. 586: Personal – Standes Ausweis von k.k. Contumaz Direc- tion zu Möttling. The rastel and the quarantine facility at Metlika (SI AS 14, Reg. VIII, f. 36 (Chol2), no. 586). 194 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 closed spaces of more or less equal size. The first one, with an entrance from the Karlovac Road, housed the Thirtieth Customs Office (Dreysigstamt) and on rainy days also provided shelter to sellers and buyers from Croatia. The passage leading from this area to the animal building was intended for those who had already completed their purchase and for driving the cattle down to the Kolpa. There, the animals were herded into the river and walked upstream along the riverbank, and thus ‘decontaminated’ led out of the river into an enclosure to the left of the Karlovac Road. The rastel enclosures were separated by two double barriers reinforced with wood planks stand- ing slightly less than two meters (or a fathom) apart to close the exposed part off from the road. Mounted between the two barriers were two pillared wooden funnels for transferring wheat grains and salt from the exposed part of the rastel into its interior. This is where all prohibited ‘toxic’ goods were removed. Three feet or slightly less than a meter from the in- ternal barrier, there was another barrier in the third, enclosed (unexposed) section of the rastel, where a servant cleaned smaller items transported from Croatia. This section housed the seat of the Metlika Customs Office, which was also used for smoking letters. The somewhat elevated platform of the lower part of this section was intended for Carniolan cattle buyers; the animals were showcased here, and trans- actions were concluded with sellers standing below the platform.86 Beyond the rastel, on the right side of the Karlo- vac Road, stood the tollhouse building, rearranged into the offices of the quarantine facility director and the quarantine physician. The former quaran- tine building on the left side of the Karlovac Road was converted into a guardhouse, with an adjacent wooden barn. Somewhat secluded, to the left of the road, stood the quarantine complex, connected to it by a secondary semi-circular road. The quarantine fa- cilities comprised seven wooden buildings enclosed by a tall wall. The first three were intended for dis- tinguished travelers and divided into several smaller rooms separating men and women, and they also accommodated their servants. Cabin no. 5 was an infirmary. Whenever necessary, one of the remain- ing three buildings, which ordinarily housed com- mon travelers, was converted into a sanitary unit. In addition to quarantine buildings for people, the au- thorities constructed stables for horses and carts, and warehouses. A special facility was arranged for airing goods. The last two buildings, which housed employ- ees, their common areas, drying and smoking units, as well as a quarantine tavern, were completely sepa- rated from the quarantine cabins to prevent contact between the quarantined travelers and the employ- 86 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (Chol 2), no. 586. ees. These also had their own designated entrance. Next to the quarantine complex stood a quarantine chapel and a house with adjacent agricultural build- ings owned by Mrs. Schebenig, the post mistress from Metlika.87 The impact of establishing the cordon sanitaire The border closure between Carniola and Croa- tia manifested primarily in the disruption and slow- down of trade on the one hand and the impeded movement of people on the other. The authorities advised the public to refrain from non-essential trade and other business transactions to avoid spreading cholera through commercial contacts.88 The cordon sanitaire had a direct economic impact not only on the border area, but also Carniola’s interior. Police reports issued by the local authorities under the Pos- tojna district shed light on the public opinion (Stim- mung und der herrschende Geist) regarding trade, fairs, the movement of food prices, and so on.89 They reveal that the area under the local authority of Snežnik only held three annual fairs instead of the usual seven. The first two—one envisaged to be held in Šentvid on the first Monday after St. Bartholomew’s Day (August 29th) and the other on the Bloke Pla- teau on Thursday, September 29th—did not take place because the cordon sanitaire was still valid on the date of the former and, in the case of the latter, the three days that transpired since the termination of the cordon left too little time to drive cattle from Croatia.90 The local authorities of Vipava reported an increase in cattle prices due to the impeded sales from Croatia and Hungary. Clearly terrified of the disease, people talked about the crippling fear of cholera (die gespannte Furcht von der Brechruhr). Still, the cordon alone could not have caused a decline in the economy and trade, even though it put a strain on them with partial closure and restrictions (Eine Abnahme in der Agrikultur, Industrie, im Kommerze erfolgte nicht. Aber der bevorstehende Sanität-Kordon dürfte diesfalls Einflüss äussern. Ohne Nachtheilen kann es nicht abgeben, wenn angränzende Ortschaften, Kre- ise, Provinzen im frühere freie Verkehre theils erschw- ert, theils abgespert werden).91 The local authorities of Hasberg detected an increase in salt prices, followed by a drop in the prices of wheat and other food- stuffs on the dissolution of the cordon.92 The local authorities of Senožeče noted an increase in trade 87 Ibid. 88 SI AS 14, Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII, fasc. 36 (35/Chol), no. 2326. 89 SI AS 117, Kresijski urad Postojna, fasc. 13, no. 256. 90 SI AS 117, Kresijski urad Postojna, fasc. 13, no. 256: police report of the local authorities of Snežnik. 91 Ibid., police report of the local authorities of Vipava. 92 Ibid., police report of the local authorities of Hasberg. 195 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–1962022 after re-establishing free flow of traffic with Croa- tia.93 The cordon sanitaire was somewhat injurious to the economy in the area under the local authority of Postojna, and its termination caused a significant drop in prices.94 As can be gathered from the joint report for the Postojna district, the decline in cattle trade was attributed not only to the general shortage of money but above all to the cordon sanitaire on the border. After the termination of the cordon, the entire district saw a noticeable drop in the prices of wheat and other foodstuffs and a fresh impetus to trade (Das Komerz schien nach der Aufhebung der gegen Ungarn und Kroatien bestandenen Sanitäts Cordons in etwas aufzuleben).95 Conclusion The last cordon sanitaire on the Carniolan-Cro- atian border was set up in 1831. During the ensuing cholera epidemics, five of which also reached Car- niola, the authorities took other preventive measures against contagious diseases, because not only did the cordons sanitaires fail to contain the spread of cholera, but they also posed an extremely complex organizational and financial challenge that hardly justified the effort and resources invested. The bor- der closures had an adverse impact on the immediate and wider surroundings by restricting the movement of people and goods, which was particularly injurious to trade flows and consequently caused food prices to soar. Given that during the subsequent epidem- ics the authorities changed the defense tactics and abandoned the costly system of border shutdowns, the defense against the first cholera epidemic in the monarchy also represents the last example of the classical struggle against the plague, characteristic of the eighteenth century. REFERENCES ARCHIVAL SOURCES SI AS – Arhiv Republike Slovenije AS 14 – Gubernij v Ljubljani, Reg. VIII AS 117 – Kresijski urad Postojna AS 1079 – Zbirka normalij SI ZAL – Zgodovinski arhiv Ljubljana LJU 489, Mesto Ljubljana, splošna mestna regi- stratura (Reg. I) 93 Ibid., police report of the local authorities of Senožeče. 94 Ibid., police report of the local authorities of Postojna. 95 Ibid., police report for the Postojna district. NEWSPAPERS Illyrisches Blatt, 1831. Laibacher Zeitung, 1831. LITERATURE AND PRINTED SOURCES Birkner, Othmar: Die bedrohte Stadt, Cholera in Wien. Wien: Franz Deuticke, 2002. Borisov, Peter: Od ranocelništva do začetkov znan- stvene kirurgije na Slovenskem. Ljubljana: SAZU, 1977. Brunton, Deborah: Dealing with disease in po- pulations: public health, 1830–1880. Medicine Transformed. Health, Disease and Society in Europe 1800–1930 (ed. Deborah Brunton). Manchester: The Open University, 2004, pp. 180–207. Eckstein, Friedrich: Die epidemische Cholera beobach- tet in Pest in den Monaten Juli, Avgust, September 1831. Pest und Leipzig, 1832. Gesetze und Verordnungen in Justi-Sache für die Deu- tschen Staaten der Oesterreichischen Monarchie von den Jahren 1831–1834. Granda, Stane: Bosanski roparji se ne bojijo voja- kov in financarjev. Slovenska kronika XIX. stoletja, 1800–1860 (ed. Janez Cvirn). Ljubljana: Nova revija, 2001, p. 174. Grmek, D. Mirko: Sanitarni kordon Vojne krajine. Medicinska enciklopedija, knjiga V. Zagreb: Leksi- kografski zavod, 1961, pp. 457–460. Holz, Eva: Razvoj cestnega omrežja na Slovenskem ob koncu 18. in v 19. stoletju. Ljubljana: ZRC SAZU, 1994. Jankovich, Anton: Die epidemische Cholera in den Ja- hren 1817–1832, ihre Wesen, Ursache und rationelle Behandlung. Ofen, 1832. Jovin, Slavko: Epidemija kolere v Vojvodini 1831 godi- ne. Novi Sad: Matica srpska, 1978. Kačičnik Gabrič, Alenka: O kmečkih dolgovih nekoli- ko drugače. Problem servitutnih pravic na posestvu Snežnik. Ljubljana: Zveza zgodovinskih društev Slovenije, Arhiv Republike Slovenije, 2004 (Knji- žnica Kronike, 8). Kobal, Franc: O koleri na Kranjskem. Zbornik Slo- venske Matice, XIII, 1911, pp. 61–158. Koblar, Anton: O človeški kugi na Kranjskem. Iz- vestja muzejskega društva za Kranjsko 1, 1891, pp. 39–55. Krebs, Gertraud: Die geographische Verbreitung der Cholera in ehemaligen Oesterreich-Ungarn in den Jahren 1831–1916. Veröffentlichung aus dem Gebiete des Volksgesundheitsdienstes. LV Band, 6. Heft, Berlin 1941. Lukács, Ágnes: Az 1831–1832 évi magyarországi kolerajárváni néhány jellegzetessége. Communi- cationes ex bibliotheca historiae medicae hungarica. Budapest, 1966. 196 KATARINA KEBER: CARNIOLA’S DEFENSE MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC IN EUROPE, 183–196 2022 Potočnik, Blaž: Potrebno poduzhenje sa kmeta, kako naj sam sebe in svoje ljudi te strashne bolesni obvaruje, v vprashanjih in odgovorih. Ljubljana, 1831. Rannegger, Harald: Die Cholera in der Steiermark 1831–1836. Diplomarbeit, Karl-Franzens-Uni- versität Graz, 1989. Schematismus für das Laibacher Gouvernements-Ge- bieth im Königreiche Illyrien, Laibach, 1831. Studen, Andrej: Prva slovenska knjižica o obrambi pred kolero. Slovenska kronika XIX. stoletja, 1800– 1860 (ed. Janez Cvirn). Ljubljana: Nova revija, 2001, pp. 183–184. The Cambridge World History of Human Disease (ed. Kenneth F. Kiple). Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1994, pp. 645–648. Vilfan, Sergij: Pravna zgodovina Slovencev. Ljublja- na: Slovenska matica, 1996. Žontar, Josip: Zapora proti kugi v Karavankah v letih 1713–1716. Prispevek k zgodovini blagovnega pro- meta in organizacije trgovine na Slovenskem v 18. stoletju. Tržič: Muzejsko društvo, 1957 (Knjižnica Muzejskega društva v Tržiču, 1). P O V Z E T E K Kranjski obrambni mehanizem za zaščito pred prvo epidemijo kolere v Evropi V tridesetih letih 19. stoletja je Evropa doživela prvo epidemijo azijske kolere. Do širitve bolezni iz Azije v Evropo je po vsej verjetnosti prišlo zaradi in- tenzivnejših trgovskih stikov in povečanega prometa med angleškim imperijem in Indijo oziroma zaradi angleške ekspanzije na vzhod. Ob pojavu kolere v bližini Habsburške monarhije leta 1830 je državna oblast ukrepala s takojšnjo zaporo meje. V ta namen so najprej po vzhodni meji monarhije vzpostavili sis- tem mejnih zdravstvenih kordonov, kasneje, ko se je bolezen pojavila znotraj monarhije, pa so zdravstve- ne kordone ustanavljali za zaščito posameznih dežel. Celotni sistem obrambe je temeljil na predpisih in praksi, ki so se v prejšnjih stoletjih izoblikovali v boju proti epidemijam kuge. Kranjski obrambni sistem proti koleri leta 1831 je bil del širših notranjih državnih obrambnih ukre- pov za zaščito avstrijskih dežel pred širitvijo kolere z Ogrske. Izgradnja sistema zdravstvenih kordonov, ki so se začenjali ob moravski meji z Galicijo, se je nada- ljevala ob nižjeavstrijski, notranjeavstrijski, kranjski in avstrijsko-primorski meji z Ogrsko. Zdravstveni kordon na kranjsko-hrvaški meji je bil vzpostavljen na podlagi sodelovanja okrožnih in carinskih oblasti z vojaškim poveljstvom. O velikem pomenu same za- pore meje pričajo visoke kazni za kršitelje predpisov in veljava sistema naglih sodb. Iz primera rastela in karantene pri Metliki je razvidno, da je stroga orga- nizacija tovrstnih kompleksov po eni strani omogo- čala zgolj osnovni promet z živili in živino, po drugi strani pa je močno omejevala gibanje ljudi. Zdravstveni kordon proti nalezljivim boleznim je bil na kranjsko-hrvaški meji leta 1831 vzpostavljen zadnjič. Ob naslednjih epidemijah kolere, kar pet jih je zajelo tudi Kranjsko, habsburška oblast zdravstve- nih kordonov ni več vzpostavljala. Poleg tega, da le- -ti niso uspeli zadržati širjenja kolere, so za oblasti predstavljali izredno velik organizacijski in gmotni napor, ki pa vložene energije in sredstev ni upravičil. Na bližnjo in daljno okolico je zapora meje delovala slabo zaradi oviranja siceršnjega pretoka ljudi in bla- ga, kar je zaviralno vplivalo predvsem na trgovske to- kove in posledično zviševalo cene živil. Ker so oblasti ob naslednjih epidemijah kolere spremenile taktiko obrambe in opustile drag sistem zapore meja, velja obramba proti prvi epidemiji kolere v Habsburški monarhiji hkrati tudi za zadnjo prakticiranje klasič- nega boja proti kugi, značilnega za 18. stoletje.