territorialisierend dar: Sie blieben die wichtigste Territorialeinteilung Preußens bis zum Ende des Staates 1947. Analog und doch völlig verschieden gestaltete sich eine ›provinzielle Staatsbildung‹ in den Niederlanden. Stefan Couperus, Harm Kaal, Nico Randeraad und Paul van Trigt zeigen in ihrem Beitrag am Beispiel Südhollands, wie sich Provinzialverwaltungen an der Staatsbildung beteiligten, indem sie sich als administrative Institutionen des neuen Einheitsstaates erfanden und mittels ›little tools of knowledge‹ Zu diesem Konzept vgl. Peter Becker / William Clark: »Introduction
In the light of the relevant terms of this issue, »state«, »space« and »administration«, this contribution considers the intertwining between representations of order, their administration, and the governance of the subjects in the sovereignty areas of Salzburg and Tyrol in the Zillertal. The different ideas of space – investigated from the perspectives of various groups of the population, of local officials, and of the government centers – changed throughout the examined period. At its beginning, the authorities in the government centers endeavored to keep the borders open for mutual exchange, whereas the local officials used their administrative tools to stage a competition with the officials of the neighboring district, e.g. by blocking and redirecting the subjects’ pathways of movement. In this situation, a more open construction of space confronted a more mistrustful one aimed at enclosure and the guarding of borders. In the context of negotiations for a general border settlement between Tyrol and Salzburg, and on the basis of newly developed conceptions of a state as having a clearly defined sovereignty area, capable of being governed without any foreign influence up to its borders, the interventions of the government centers started to change. Borders were adjusted and a clear assignment of the subjects was demanded. However, the more an exact correspondence between space and sovereignty was pursued, the more obvious the impossibility of this undertaking became. Seemingly well-demarcated border lines appeared vague when regarded closely. Their official description was at odds with the subjects’ construction and usage of spaces. While their spatial behaviors were determined by the norms of the sovereign centers and controlled by the administrative work of the officials, the subjects developed their own strategies for dealing with these interventions in their constructions of space and adjusting to them.
Stefan Couperus, Harm Kaal, Nico Randeraad and Paul van Trigt
municipalities, water management, supervision of infrastructural work, involvement in welfare and health arrangements, and the monitoring of economic developments. We foreground the ›little tools of knowledge‹, such as periodical reports, circulars, statistical investigations, handbooks, and the like, to capture the administrative mentality of the officials in action. Our choice of sources has been inspired by Peter Becker / William Clark (ed.): Little Tools of Knowledge. Historical Essays on Academic and Bureaucratic Practices, Ann Arbor 2001. It is the thick description and
A Long Normative History of a Statistical Category in the U.K
that circulation shapes knowledge. Knowledge circulates between different historical actors with different agendas and thus forms an important element in producing knowledges. For the idea of circulating knowledge, see Philipp Sarasin, »Was ist Wissensgeschichte?«, in: Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur 36 (2011), p. 159–172. In the case of the ›Head of Household‹ it was one specific tool that circulated between different historical actors and produced knowledge.
This specific tool leads us to the administrative component of the
their works, in two complementary ways. First, this critical approach enables them to understand the position they occupy in the academic field, thus creating awareness that can lead them to question the intellectual categories they have used to study administrative history as well as their research practices. Second, the theory of fields provides the intellectual tools to conduct empirical studies that present generalizable conclusions. If this has been a goal more easily achieved in the social sciences, historical studies have struggled more with the possibility of
consist of placing the emphasis on operations and cultural techniques, as they rely on symbols, persons, and material artifacts, interchange them, and are responsible for investigating and punishing someone as a querulous person. Of course, a media history of the excessive sense of justice deals with people who are labeled querulous – that goes without saying. However, one dare not fall into the trap of overlooking the cultural tools and media which are hidden behind litigious paranoia.
The ›Creation‹ of Querulanten
Before querulency was investigated as a form of
of the vaccine story: the organisation of administrative correspondence, the censorship of medical information, the forms furnished by the administration for registering vaccinations, or the engravings of vaccine pustules. It is through these »details«, these »little tools of knowledge« Peter Becker, William Clark, »Introduction«, in: Peter Becker, William Clark (eds.), Little Tools of Knowledge. Historical Essays on Academic and Bureaucratic Practices, Ann Arbor 2001, p. 1–34. that the proof of vaccine’s perfection was administered and biopolitics exercised
André Ourednik, Guido Koller, Peter Fleer and Stefan Nellen
). Algorithms become its tool of international sentiment expression alignment. Whatever the purpose and chosen method of TSA, making its epistemic posture explicit is essential for its use and the interpretation of its results.
If an algorithm is to attribute sentiments to data of any type, it needs a predefined discrete and finite set of sentiment categories. Whether such a set can be constructed at all is of course in dispute, The complexity of this psychological disputatio ramifies in neuroscience, biology, linguistics, anthropology and philosophy. Darwin proposed the
between public service and subjects and between state and society. I use this concept to pinpoint the situational, interactional character of communication that neither extended to an emotional community nor comprised an emotional space. The participants in these interactions shared emotional situations but could belong to different emotional communities defined by generation, class and education. On emotional community as a conceptual tool, cf. Barbara H. Rosenwein: »Problems and Methods in the History of Emotions«, in: Passions in Context 1 (2010), pp. 1–32, at pp. 10
. Whether there were attempts similar to Eger’s at making welfare administration a tool for nationalizing Bohemia’s population in other multilingual crown lands, such as Styria or Carinthia, where similar processes of national segregation had happened before 1914, requires further research. Martin Moll: Kein Burgfrieden. Der deutsch-slowenische Nationalitätenkonflikt in der Steiermark 1900–1918, Innsbruck 2007; Andreas Moritsch: »Modernisierung und nationale Differenzierung bis 1918«, in: Andreas Moritsch (ed.): Austria-Slovenica. Die Kärntner Slovenen und die Nation