Luca Mannori, Erk Volkmar Heyen:
Editorial, VII-XII
(Volltext: http://www.uni-greifswald.de/~lo1/ed13.htm)

I. Themenschwerpunkt

Antonella Alimento:
Entre justice distributive et développement économique: la lutte pour la création de cadastres généraux au 18e siècle, 1-27

Behind the surveyed, cadastral maps of the 19th century it is possible to perceive the faint outline of the sequence of political and institutional events, technical choices and economic debates that had already come to light in the preceding century. It was precisely during the 18th century that the creation of general land registers asserted itself as a priority imperative in several European states, thereby setting the stage for its apotheosis in the modern era. Apart from the notable exception of Great Britain, where land taxes were governed by directly associating their apportionment with the property owners, those states that took upon themselves the task of assuring "public well-being", made use of this instrument as a means of guaranteeing fiscal equality, while, at the same time, freeing themselves from the obstacles that nobles, clerics and anyone else holding particular privileges had been forever hurling against them.
Starting in the 1750s, with the birth of political economy and the spread of the Physiocratic movement in Europe, interest in land registers gained increasing popularity. By tying the strength of a given state to increases in its national wealth, economists and the more knowledgeable among the various administrators made use of the new fiscal equalizing instrument to stimulate and increase agricultural production. In Baden and in the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the establishment of land registers was included in a larger tax reform inspired by the Physiocrats, which provided for the creation of a single tax on net yields.

Luca Mannori:
"Aestima sive Cadastra": Land Register and Legal Thought in Roman-Law Europe (14th-18th Centuries), 29-53

Before, during the 18th century, political economy as an autonomous discipline appeared, only Roman-law jurists were able to draft a general theory of taxation. This theory, which exactly mirrors the contours of the fiscal practices of the time, was founded upon the premise that every direct tax (collecta), even when imposed by a sovereign, had to be assessed and administered by that unwieldy hierarchy of local bodies upon which each state of the period was based. As a consequence, the distribution of the fiscal burden was regarded as being a mere internal matter of each communitas civium.
The land register itself, which had begun to be put to use in many European regions starting in the 14th century, was depicted as a sort of multilateral contract stipulated by the members of a corporate body in order to better distribute local outlays among themselves. It is precisely in the light of this postulate that the doctrine dealt with the crucial question whether the register was capable or not of binding the property held by those who did not belong to the collective body (as was the case with clerics, feudal landlords, foreigners and other privileged personages). Around this problem a centuries-long debate flourished and went on being haggled over in the courtrooms until the end of the old regime, thus testifying to the actual continuation of early-modern fiscal techniques as regards to those extant in late medieval times.
Nevertheless, despite the fact that these elements were part and parcel of a long period of relative stability, the Renaissance set the scene for the introduction of a number of remarkable innovations into the theoretical framework of land taxa-
tion. Starting from the late 16th century, legal scholars began to look at the fiscal evaluation of land as a task to be taken on and carried out directly by central governments, following the example of the old Roman census, which was unearthed thanks to the new cultural climate of juridical humanism. Gradually, the idea of a state-run register took shape during the 17th century, while jurisprudence in the courts increasingly strengthened the register's power to bind landed property even when its owner happened to be a privileged person. We arrive thus at the modern 18th-century register, which shows itself to be the product of an age-old tradition and, especially, the result of a bicentenary, unflagging absolutist policy aimed at the regulation of a highly fragmentary and polycentric society.

Carlo Capra, Giancarlo Galli:
The 18th-Century Land Register in the State of Milan, 55-81

The article retraces the long and complicated history of the making of the new cadastral survey through the reigns of Charles VI and Maria Theresia, highlighting the role of two successive commissions, installed respectively in 1718-1733 and 1749-1758, and their struggle against fierce opposition put up by the local ruling classes and particularly by the Milanese patriciate. Furthermore, the impact of this wide-ranging reform on different sectors of the Lombard economy and society is dealt with. Its effects, by no means confined to the sphere of fiscal justice, on the one hand involved the complete restructuring of local administration, and on the other hand stimulated the growth of capitalist agriculture while raising new problems for small producers and for the mountain area.

Alfredo Viggiano:
Estimates and Cadastres in the 18th-Century Venetian State, 83-100

In contrast to other Italian states, the Venetian Republic did not introduce a land register during the 18th century. Nevertheless, there was a certain debate, in the 1790s, about the introduction of a cadastre following the example of the Habsburg-Lombardy model. The article tries to show that this failure is mainly due to the political and fiscal dualism between Venice, the capital city whose interests prevailed in republican ideology, and the mainland.

Alessandra Contini, Francesco Martelli:
Land Register, Taxation System and Political Conflict in 18th-Century Tuscany, 101-119

The article deals with the attempt to create a single land register in Tuscany under the House of Lorraine, i.e. that Tuscany which constituted one of the most interesting and responsive political laboratories in 18th-century Europe. This attempt has been considered by many authors to be simply an unsuccessful reform. The article brings to light instead the rich under-layer of analyses by which this failure (real or supposed) was accompanied. Almost absent among the topics of debate during the years of the Lorraine Regency of Francesco Stefano (1737-1765), the question of the land register re-emerged in 1763, and then it became the centre of a very lively political conflict starting with Pietro Leopoldo's accession to the Grand Dukedom of Tuscany in 1765. Sustained by the will of the prince and by some of his collaborators with pro-physiocratic tendencies, intense experimentation with new land registers began in various parts of the state. Yet, despite partial successes, the idea of a general land register was definitively abandoned in 1785. What went on in the small laboratory of Tuscany thus faithfully reflected the changing climate of late Enlightenment Europe. The difficulties of absolutisme éclairé, the outdating of physiocratic doctrines, and the spread of the new English economic culture also determined the suspension of the land register, which in the eyes of contemporaries represented the model of a society markedly directed by the state.

Stefano Tabacchi:
Land Registers and Cadastral Policy in the Papal State (17th-18th Century), 121-143

The main claim of the article is that until the end of the 17th century land registers were essentially an instrument for the self-government of local communities. Although since the middle of the 16th century the pontifical government had exercised control over the local finances and the keeping of land registers, the choice of the criteria for land registration was largely left to the local oligarchies. Starting from the middle of the 17th century, the general crisis of local finances led the papal government to issue regulations on land registers, prescribing uniform registration criteria and imposing the creation of land registers where there were none. This cautious reform policy turned out to be insufficient during the first half of the 18th century, when the wars of succession led to an exorbitant increase of the communities' debts. During Pius VI's pontificate, the papal government tried to pursue a general fiscal reform and imposed the creation of a unified land register. The project, however, had to face strong opposition on the part of the local communities. At the end of the century, the unified land register was almost completed, but the fiscal reform had been delayed too long for it to produce a real reorganisation of the social and political balances of the state.

Alessandra Bulgarelli Lukacs:
Genesis of the Cadastre in the Kingdom of Naples in the Early 18th Century, 145-166

As compared to the experiences of other states, the southern Italian cadastre – launched by the sovereign in 1739 – is certainly not an advanced pattern either in terms of assessment technique or of its results. There are numerous limits that historiography unanimously identifies to define the operation's characteristics and its difference from the geometrically detailed cadastres of Lombardy and Piedmont. The reasons for these shortcomings can be blamed on the resistance offered by ruling élites in the capital and provinces against the achievement of the undertaking. The article puts forward a hypothesis that rereads the drawing up of the cadastre from the slant of the major lobbies' petitions in previous years, in particular public debt owners and the Neapolitan aristocracy. Far more than the state, they possessed knowledge of the vast southern territory and knew the breakdown of wealth and of society in local communities and the best revenue-sharing form. Their attention was mainly focused on the emergence of a new order, "well-off persons", forerunners of the local landed middle class who largely evaded taxes. The authoritativeness of these indications results mainly from the fact that the sovereign was subject to meet the said lobbies' demands on account of the donation of new, large extraordinary payments, indispensable for the working of the state machine itself. In this way, the cadastre no longer appeared as an initiative destined to fail due to the state's weakness, but more as an experience prompted by the strongest lobby – state creditors – within the legislative framework of a centuries-old tradition.

Concepción Camarero Bullón:
The Cadastre of the Crown of Castile in the Mid-18th Century, 167-191

The article deals with the economic and legal framework in which the first Castilian cadastre, known as the Ensenada Cadastre, was launched. It covers the method and conduct of the verifications, the resulting documentation and the degree of accuracy and reliability of the information gathered. Moreover, it includes a brief account of the first Spanish urban cadastre, carried out solely in Madrid and known as the Planimetry General of Madrid; it was conducted in the same period and bears a direct relation to the Ensenada Cadastre.
In 1750, under the guidance of the then Secretary of the Treasury, the Marquis of Ensenada, a cadastre of the Crown of Castile was commenced. It came by way of preparing for a profound fiscal reform aimed at improving the pitiful state of the Castilian treasury, simplifying the system of contributions and making it fairer. The idea was to replace income from the provinces by a single tax, which was intended to be universal and proportional to the wealth of the taxpayers. It was thus necessary to investigate the wealth of the subjects. On 10 October 1749, a royal decree authorising the conduct of the cadastre was enacted. It was laid down that the highest body responsible for the cadastre would be a board known as the Single Tax Board, with headquarters in Madrid, and that, in the provinces, the verifications would be supervised by the provincial quartermasters. The fieldwork lasted from 1750 to 1756 and by 1759, all the documentation had been completed. While the work was in progress, however, it proved increasingly difficult to find enough qualified personnel. It was therefore decided to leave the cartography of the territory for another time, and map-making was limited to highly rudimentary drafts of plots of land and townships. The single tax was not introduced and the cadastre was never used for the purpose for which it was designed.

Pilar García Trobat:
A Forgotten Result of the Spanish War of Succession: the Cadastre and its Fiscal Effects on the Crown of Aragón, 193-216

In the aftermath of the Spanish War of Succession (1700-1715), fiscal needs led to the attempt to introduce Castilian taxes in the vanquished territories. Their complexity, however, soon made it necessary to abandon the project and to consider instead the collection of a quantity equivalent to what would have been received if the Castilian taxes had been established. This paved the way for a thorough reform of the tax system. A significant transformation was achieved that changed old indirect taxes on consumption into forms of direct taxation based on registers of property and income. These new taxes were known as the catastro in Catalunya, equivalente in Valencia, única contribución in Aragón and talla in Mallorca. So in the Crown of Aragón the cadastre was one of the most notable innovations brought in after the War of Succession. But it was merely in the territories of the defeated that these measures could be pushed through, even if they could not be carried out successfully everywhere in these lands. As a result, a great inequality between the fiscal burden borne by a Castilian and that of any inhabitant of the territories of Aragón developed. It was not before the liberal era of Alejandro Mon, in the middle of the 19th century, that the Castilian tax system could be modernised.

Mireille Touzery:
Entre taille réelle et taille personnelle: la monarchie française et le cadastre au 18e siècle, 217-246

In 1763, the year of Louis XV´s project of a general cadastre, only the South of France was familiar with this type of document, a leftover from a strong notion of property in the ancient Roman province of Narbonne, whereas in the North society was dominated by relationships of man to man as known from feudal times. Thus, in the Middle Ages, the royal tax system was based on a distinction between noble and non-noble land in the South, and between noble and non-noble persons in the North. A systematic registration of land properties could question this last distinction and thereby finally the estate system. This point was of less importance for the owners of noble land in the South, often commoners, without personal noble privilege, disadvantaged by the exclusion of municipal instances caused by this property, and this for a minor financial profit after centuries. In the North, on the contrary, the fiscal privilege was of a large economic interest, and in fact there was no political exclusion because the lords had other ways to gain influence on the communities' affairs. In the South, the opposition against Louis XV's cadastral project came from its perception as an instrument of centralisation. The old compoix were in the hands of local instances, whereas a cadastre instigated by Paris was an attack against the local liberties. The royal project did not succeed, but had a tactical utility, as its abandonment allowed the prolongation of the vingtième, a very necessary tax in this difficult period at the end of the Seven Years War.

Alain Blanchard:
Cadastre en Limousin au siècle des Lumières: une expérience inachevée, 247-262

In 18th-century Limousin, numerous attempts were made to align taxes with income, principally from real estate. These attempts were linked to the monarchy's attempts to put in place a form of tax on income more equitable than the taille arbitraire and above all suitable to generate a higher tax yield. Two intendants, Tourny from 1730 to 1743 and Turgot from 1761 to 1774, worked for more than 25 years to establish a description, a survey and an assessment of all plots of land in the parishes of the généralité of Limoges, thereby allowing to base the tax to be paid on a certain tariff for each income category. Such a cadastre was realised, however, in but two out of three parishes. The rich archival documentation of this unfinished experiment deserves further analysis.

Antoine-Marie Graziani:
Le plan terrier de la Corse, 1770-1795, 263-284

Established at the end of the 18th century, the Corsican plan terrier is one of the main cartographic documents produced by the French monarchy for cadastral purposes. After the French conquest of the island in 1769, the new government wanted to know the exact state of its property and rights over the island. Another aim, which ended up by replacing the first, was to realise a detailed description of the country in order to regenerate the island. It is, therefore, the mixture of political and scientific purposes that make the Corsican plan terrier a document of great interest.

Claude de Moreau de Gerbehaye:
La réalisation du cadastre du Luxembourg, ses objectifs et ses conséquences (fin du 17e-18e siècle), 285-315

The Duchy of Luxembourg, one of the provinces of the Austrian Low Countries of the 18th century, was characterised by a less organised, more unfair and more contested fiscal system than its neighbours. An area of poor-quality soil with a low population density, Luxembourg had nothing to attract the attention of the Brussels government. However, thanks to a growth and centralisation of public authorities, errors and disproof, inequitable taxation progressively became an important issue of reform. The first large-scale initiatives date back to the time of the country´s annexation by Louis XIV, between 1684 and 1697. The Spanish and Austrian regimes which followed had at first to fight against the privileged people led by prelates of major monasteries. The system of mixed taxation, which was at the same time both personal and real, had extended the nature of exemptions to many categories of political, economic, social and religious élites. In order to assess its authority, the government decided to carry out a radical reformation of its fiscal tool. The very large autonomy used and abused by the provincial states was considerably reduced. Landed property, on which most of the economic activities of the Duchy rested, was taken as a basis for a fiscal repartition. The decision to draw up a land register led to a general census of landed properties, including those of the upper classes. While it never achieved all its objectives, this operation did provide the central government with a key to mathematical repartition and, therefore, to the control and trusteeship of provincial and local powers.

II. Forum

Toomas Anepaio, Marju Luts:
Estnische Verwaltungsgeschichtsschreibung, 319-343

The Republic of Estonia proclaimed during the First World War represented a challenge to Estonian professional historiography, a discipline that was only in the making at the time. As far as public administration is concerned, the new national historiography concentrated on the Swedish Era of the 16th-17th centuries, when the situation of the Estonian peasantry, still subjected to serfdom, was alleviated to a certain extent. Paradoxically, the history of the self-government of freed peasants in the 19th century became an issue for Baltic-German historiography, whereas Estonian national historiography sought to distance itself from the latter. Instead, more attention was paid to the recent administrative history of the Republic of Estonia.
In Estonia under Soviet rule remarkably great attention was paid to the demolition of the so-called bourgeois apparatus of power and the construction of a Soviet administrative system. In contrast to the high degree of personalisation which characterised the research of emigrated Estonians, Soviet history writing was as impersonal as possible and focused on the so-called leading role of the Communist Party. Despite the impressive research capacity in the field of Soviet administration's history, the studies published at the time cannot be regarded as scientifically grounded in the traditional sense of the notion. However, scientifically serious publications appeared on earlier administrative history, especially in connection with the history of Estonia's peasantry.
In newly independent Estonia there is no more discussion about an opposition between Baltic-German and Estonian historiography. On the contrary, similarities in methodology (more empirical-descriptive than theoretical-explanatory) and view are quite detectable. However, Estonians seem to concentrate more on personalised recent history, whereas Baltic-Germans focus on earlier history.

Christof Dipper:
Zeitschriftenporträt: "Storia, Amministrazione, Costituzione", 345-357

The article first outlines the periodical's personal and institutional background, then deals with its programme – political-administrative thinking, state and society in the last two centuries, and this in an international context – and finally examines how this programme materialises in the eight issues published since 1993. The first and striking result is the unusually high presence of the editors in every volume. Second, and less surprising, the majority of the articles deal with public administration; the central administration is seen as bête noire, the local as a paradise (lost) instead. Therefore – third – most of the articles concern the liberal monarchy, as for Italy, and the "long" 19th century, as for foreign countries; only the latest issue (2000) privileges the European Community and consequently the last five decades. Fourth, to a remarkably high degree the periodical looks abroad, preferably to Western Europe or the United States; nearly half of its contributions do so, most of them presenting the foreign case as a model for Italy. Summing up, one has to state that this periodical's message is the devolution of Italy as an imperative necessity and that it wants to accompany this process looking back to history and sideways to other countries.

Anschriftenverzeichnis, 369