The First Quarantine: How the Plague Became a Political Disease

Abstract

The great plague of 1665-1666 is one of the starting points for the birth of biopolitics in its modern form. The quarantine measures introduced by the government have been considered effective from the medical point of view since the middle of the 18th century. However, many of those contemporary with the plague were convinced that the state was only worsening matters for London’s inhabitants. The author examines why the plague elicited such an ambivalent response in England and how the disease stopped being a composite object and turned into a “comfortable, domesticated” concept. The article investigates why the moral assessment of those measures has become so different over the past hundred years and shows how the quarantine in London influenced the “hygienic revolution.” Apart from its historical interest, this case is a suitable topic for the use of STS methodology because it illustrates the impossibility providing a complete description of the quarantine process and subsequent medical treatment in terms of a conflict between different actors. In order to understand why these measures have subsequently been perceived in this fashion, the author applies the concept of Lovecraftian horror, which offers a way to describe the situation of “collisions” with the plague. By describing how biopolitics released the moral tension built up by the co-existence of different interpretations of the causes of the epidemic, the author reconstructs the retrospective creation of the myth about the success of the quarantine. He contrasts the logic of “multiplicity” with the unifying descriptions and shows the kind of problems a “blurred” ontology can bring on during a crisis in everyday life. This leads to a discussion of the difficulty of holding onto unstable objects that have the potential for liberation from the logic of paternalistic care.