The eighteenth-century passion to order and systematize as well as to measure and calculate has been explained as a result of both the Scientific Revolution and the emergence of centralized states.... Show moreThe eighteenth-century passion to order and systematize as well as to measure and calculate has been explained as a result of both the Scientific Revolution and the emergence of centralized states. The first, enabled the new experimental philosophy that quantified the 'sciences', while the latter created the need for statistics (e.g., demographic data). This paper explores the diffusion of the ‘quantifying spirit’ among the wider public in the eighteenth century and offers alternative explanation for the interest of the population at large in structured quantitative data. Using a corpus of 188 handwritten chronicles, produced by a heterogenous group of middle-class authors from the Low Countries, between 1500-1800, it analyses how early modern chroniclers used Western/Hindu-Arabic numerals in their writings, and under which circumstances this changed in the eighteenth century. From the analysis it appears that chroniclers used meteorological measurement and demographic data for different purposes than natural philosophers and (centralized) governments. Moreover, it transpires that the collection of quantitative data was initially stimulated by local governments, subsequently made public by various media, and picked up by the society at large and higher authorities. Show less
One of the reasons why early modern people chronicled current events in their communities, was to search for patterns. Chroniclers frequently recorded odd weather patterns (scorching summers or... Show moreOne of the reasons why early modern people chronicled current events in their communities, was to search for patterns. Chroniclers frequently recorded odd weather patterns (scorching summers or frigid winters), famines, troop movements, wars, epidemics, prices, prodigies, monstrous births, and other premonitions to search for elements that could help them to comprehend current, and to anticipate on, future events. In this paper I will explore how chroniclers from the Low Countries constructed causal relations between various phenomena and events, and how that changed between 1500 and 1850. I will do so by combining computational and historical methods to analyse 250 early modern Dutch chronicles, focusing especially on authors of the middling sort (e.g., farmers, merchants, and local officials). As a result, we gain insight on how they tried to get grip on current events in their attempt to limit future harm.In this paper I will focus especially on how chroniclers collected data on epidemics, meteorological phenomena, and food- and fuel prices, knowledge which they regarded as useful. Using this evidence, I will argue that throughout the period, this group continued to believe in the idea that disruptive events could have both human and natural but also supernatural origins. Both faith and reason conditioned responses to potential hazards, and the solutions chosen were discussed side-by-side, usually without an apparent sense of conflict. However, natural explanations became more complex over time, which resulted in more detailed explanations on the causes and consequences of (future) hazards. By focussing on the information that chroniclers regarded as useful, and studying the causal relations they constructed, we can not only reconstruct how chroniclers coped with contemporary hazards and crises, but also how they used their chronicle as a compass and anchor to get some grip on events as they sailed into an uncertain future. Show less
Especially with reference to the early modern period the relation between medicine and religion has often been studied as a zero-sum game, in which the 'disenchantment' of the world was a... Show moreEspecially with reference to the early modern period the relation between medicine and religion has often been studied as a zero-sum game, in which the 'disenchantment' of the world was a precondition for medical progress and innovation. Using digital methods to analyse a corpus of 300 handwritten chronicles from the Chronicling Novelty project led by prof. dr. Judith Pollmann and dr. Erika Kuijpers, new comparative and long-term research is possible to study the relation between religious and medical practices in the Low Countries among the middle-class. Writing a new 'history from below' by studying chronicles as collections of knowledge enables historians to study religious and medical practices not only side by side, but also in relation to each other, as well as to explore how this relation was perceived by the chroniclers. By examining both Catholic and Protestant authors from the Southern- and Northern Netherlands, this paper will present two perspectives on the changing relation between medicine and religion in the early modern period. First, the causal relation between 'divine' and 'natural' explanations for epidemics among non-medical experts. Secondly, how a group of middle-class authors used religious and medical practices simultaneously. As a result, this paper not only nuances the dichotomy between medicine and religion, but also provides insight in the how Catholics and Protestants reflected upon medical novelties in relation to their faith. Show less
The methods of preventing and controlling plagues depended heavily on contemporary understandings of its causes and course. However, this ‘contemporary understanding’ refers in general to the... Show moreThe methods of preventing and controlling plagues depended heavily on contemporary understandings of its causes and course. However, this ‘contemporary understanding’ refers in general to the printed ideas expressed by; authorities, scholars and medical practitioners, and often excludes how ‘ordinary’ people framed epidemics. Chronicles – handwritten and chronological records of events – offer a new perspective on how the middle class of Dutch society responded to epidemics and provides an insight on how they thought and acted upon plagues and disasters.Based on my current research of 115 chronicles written between 1500 and 1850, it seems that ordinary people, as well as those in positions of authority, secular, intellectual, and religious, continued to believe the idea that plagues could have natural and supernatural origins. Both faith and reason conditioned responses to plague and the solutions chosen did not prove antagonistic to another. The two systems of belief worked together, usually harmoniously. However, even if most people accepted the ultimate divine origin of plague, it did not prevent people from seeking assistance from mortal healers nor governments from enacting public health ordinances. Moreover, they also acknowledged the role of other factors, including odd weather patterns (scorching summers or frigid winters), famines, troop movements, wars, ‘fetid miasmas,’ stagnant pools of water, prodigies, monstrous births, and other premonitions.Analysing the relationships that chroniclers made between epidemic plagues and other factors, and how they changed diachronically - under the influence of ‘new’ knowledge - is the core of my research. As a result, the framing of epidemic diseases tended to be holistic and inclusive, although the explanation and the combination of causes changed diachronically. Therefore, studying epidemics by analysing chronicles not only enables historians to investigate the response of the populace on epidemics, but provides an insight in their worldview as well. Show less
