This paper attempts to reconstruct the debate that marked the advent o
f vaccination in the 19th century. Having to contend with the ongoing
practice of variolation, backed by professional variolators and a pres
iding deity, advocates of vaccination sought to portray the practice a
s a form of treason that needed to be outlawed on the ground that it p
rovoked epidemics and hence was a public threat. The paper recasts the
encounter by arguing that the preference for variolation may actually
have been based on the continuous failure of vaccination, making it a
risky venture for individual patients. Variolation, on the contrary,
invariably 'took', and as part of a therapeutics ensured individual ca
re and safe passage to patients. In the light of this, the paper exami
nes the record of vaccination practices in;the 19th century. Proffered
with fanfare under the sign of individual safely and public welfare,
the reach of vaccination was limited. But the rhetoric that sustained
it was clearly constitutive of both a European self and a stare in the
making. As the prototype prophylactic it heralded the insinuation of
the state between variolators and their erstwhile clients: a sign of t
he state's attempt to appropriate the right to be the sole addressee b
etween state and citizen. More fundamentally, it was constitutive of t
he very terms 'state' and 'citizen', and their mutual relations.