{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016253869969040248, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006191950464396285, 'mean_word_length': 5.596938775510204, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lazaretto Ambiguity in the Early Nineteenth-Century Mediterranean

Abstract:This article considers the ambiguity surrounding the lazarettos status as institutions of Mediterranean port cities by examining the contradiction between their vital economic role, the numerous regulations that proscribed access to these institutions, and the novel ways they were governed. The argumentative spine will be a comparison of the contrasting trajectories of the lazarettos of Marseille and Malta. The former complex was known as the preeminent institution in the Mediterranean as the nineteenth century began, yet the Marseille Board of Health resolutely sought to retain its traditional Independence from France's central government. The sprawling building complex itself (the Lazaret d'Arenc) was long ago dismantled. The Lazaretto of Malta took over as the busiest quarantine station in the Mediterranean by the 1830s, and it was always governed with more flexibility. This complex has survived and is the subject of a modern restoration effort. This article considers the way in which early nineteenth century histories of administration, demarcation, and proscription of access played a role in the long-term fate of both institutions after universal, mandatory quarantine broke down in the 1850s.