Pre-Scientific Stage of Criminology

Item 6. The Pre-Scientific Stage of Criminology

Origins

The pre-scientific stage of criminology is an early stage that reaches up to around 1750. Until then, the prevailing approach to crime was the law of retaliation (“an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”). Earlier, during the Middle Ages, rules were primarily social or religious, and punishments were often corporal. In the pre-scientific stage of criminology, two approaches can be distinguished based on the methods used:

1. The Classic Approach

A product of Enlightenment ideas and reforms in Criminal Law. Its method is abstract and deductive.

2. The Empirical Approach

This approach introduces empirical observation into criminal investigation. It involves specialists from various disciplines (physiognomists, phrenologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, etc.). Both approaches overlapped in time.

Classical Approach

Thomas More

Author of Utopia, More was a key figure in utopian thought. He was among the first to connect crime with economic factors, highlighting the unequal distribution of wealth (especially in agriculture) and poverty as causes of criminal activity. He argued that crime results from multiple factors (wars, cultural and educational deficits, social environment, leisure, etc.), but emphasized socioeconomic factors.

More’s work reflects the socioeconomic conditions of 16th-century England, where peasants migrated to cities and often resorted to begging or stealing to survive. He proposed ensuring everyone’s subsistence so that no one would be forced to steal out of necessity. Another notable proposal was for offenders to compensate victims through their labor.

More openly criticized the harshness and disproportionate punishments of his time.

Cesare Beccaria

In his influential work, On Crimes and Punishments (1764), Beccaria:

  • Criticized the irrationality, cruelty, and arbitrariness of punishments.
  • Advocated for the rule of law, limits on judicial discretion, and the principle of proportionality.

Principle of Legality: Laws should specify which actions or omissions constitute criminal offenses and the corresponding penalties. At the time, punishments were often decreed by the judge’s will. Beccaria also believed that the certainty of punishment could act as a deterrent, as offenders would be aware of the consequences of their actions.

Principle of Proportionality: Penalties should be proportionate to the seriousness of the offense.

Division of Powers: Influenced by Montesquieu’s The Spirit of Laws (1748), Beccaria advocated for the separation of powers, particularly between the legislative and judicial branches. The legislature should create laws, and the courts should impose penalties according to those laws.

Beccaria promoted a utilitarian view of punishment, arguing that it should be useful. He believed that the death penalty and torture were not useful. The goal of punishment should be prevention (deterrence) rather than retribution.

He advocated for the humanization and rationalization of the penal system, arguing that certain, swift, and proportionate punishments were more effective than harsh and cruel ones.

The pillars of Beccaria’s criminal policy were:

  • Clear and simple laws
  • Prevalence of freedom and reason
  • Justice free of corruption
  • Rewards for honest citizens
  • Raising the cultural and educational level

He criticized the death penalty, arguing from a utilitarian perspective that it was not effective.

Manuel de Lardizábal

Known as the “Spanish Beccaria,” Lardizábal’s work was aimed at legal experts and contributed to the codification of law. He emphasized prevention (utilitarianism) and argued that penalties should be:

  • Defined by law
  • Personal and non-transferable
  • Based on guilt
  • Proportionate to the seriousness of the crime
  • Publicly known
  • Imposed promptly

Early Empirical Trial and Error: Pioneers of Penology, Physiognomy, Phrenology, Psychiatry, and Anthropology

The pre-scientific stage saw a shift in the method of study, with the introduction of observation. This approach involved various doctrinal perspectives and multiple fields of knowledge. It paved the way for positivist criminology.

Pioneers of Penology: John Howard and Jeremy Bentham

Howard and Bentham studied the realities of prisons in their time and proposed reforms.

John Howard: Howard began investigating prison conditions through his own experiences. In 1777, he published The State of the Prisons in England and Wales, which exposed the appalling conditions of the prison system. He advocated for reforms, including:

  1. Improved prison hygiene to prevent disease and epidemics.
  2. Separation and classification of convicts (felons vs. misdemeanors, by gender, age, and sentence type).
  3. Promoting work and compulsory education for convicts.
  4. Adoption of the cellular system (isolating convicts in individual cells).
  5. Abolition of the right of “carcelaje” (fees charged to prisoners by jailers).

Howard’s reforms were implemented through the Howards Acts.

Jeremy Bentham: Bentham’s most famous contribution was the Panopticon, an architectural model for a prison. It featured a circular design with a central watchtower. Bentham sought to find the least painful punishment that was also the most useful. He advocated for improvements in food, hygiene, and care for prisoners.

Criminological Contributions from Various Fields:

Physiognomy: Physiognomy studied the relationship between a person’s external appearance and their personality, based on the idea that the body and mind are interconnected. It was prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries.

Key Figures:

Giambattista della Porta: In his work De Humana Physiognomonia (1583), della Porta studied facial expressions and gestures, arguing that certain moods have external manifestations (e.g., sadness-crying, joy-laughter). He believed that criminal behavior could also be observed externally. He was the first to link body and mind empirically, visiting prisons and studying autopsies of criminals.

Johann Kaspar Lavater: Lavater believed that a person’s physical appearance reflected their mind, emphasizing the interdependence between external and internal characteristics. He argued that facial beauty or ugliness corresponded to goodness or badness of spirit. He described a sketch of a “naturally evil man” who would be an incorrigible and dangerous offender, characterized by physical ugliness. This concept anticipated Lombroso’s “born criminal.” Lavater’s approach was pre-scientific and lacked methodological rigor.

Phrenology: Phrenology developed in the 19th century as an extension of physiognomy. It advocated for the theory of localization, which posited that each mental function has a specific location in the brain. Phrenologists believed that the cause of crime lay in brain malformations and dysfunctions, which could be investigated by studying the skull.

Key Figures:

Franz Joseph Gall: Gall examined the skulls of over 780 offenders and identified areas he believed were associated with sexual instinct, acquisitiveness, and murder. He developed a brain map with 38 regions, each housing different mental faculties, feelings, and instincts. In 1810, he published The Anatomy and Physiology of the Nervous System in General, and of the Brain in Particular, which outlined his theory of localization and brain mapping (organography).

Mariano Cubí y Soler: In his Manual of Phrenology (1843), Cubí y Soler further developed the theory of localization, concluding that the shape of a person’s head could indicate criminal tendencies (e.g., bumps on the sides of the head indicated a thief). He also developed a phrenological map dividing the brain into regions.

Psychiatry: Psychiatry studied offenders as mentally ill individuals. Its postulates were based on two main theories:

  • Moral Insanity: This theory proposed that individuals commit crimes due to mental illness, specifically a deficiency in the moral substratum of personality.
  • Degeneration Theory: This theory posited that offenders suffered from moral insanity, a hereditary disease transmitted across generations, leading to the degeneration of the human species. This theory is no longer considered valid.

Key Figures:

Philippe Pinel: Considered the “father of psychiatry,” Pinel pioneered the field and established the first psychiatric center. He conducted medical follow-ups of mentally ill individuals and developed initial clinical diagnoses and psychiatric treatments. He was the first to distinguish between mental patients and criminals.

Jean-Étienne Dominique Esquirol: A student of Pinel, Esquirol contributed to the consolidation of psychiatry as a distinct discipline. He systematized psychiatric illnesses, classifying them as “manias” and categorizing them into:

  1. Intellectual Manias: Diseases affecting the intellect.
  2. Affective Manias: Diseases affecting emotions, character, etc.
  3. Instinctive or Volitional Manias: Diseases affecting the will (monomanias or partial insanities).

James Cowles Prichard: Prichard was the first to identify abnormalities in the emotional aspect of patients while their intellect remained intact. This corresponds to the modern concept of psychopathy. He used the term “moral insanity” to describe individuals with impaired moral faculties, unable to feel affection or remorse. He argued that in such cases, moral principles were “strangely perverted or depraved” and self-control was lost or severely damaged. Prichard focused on a moral impairment that was not attributed to intelligence.

Prosper Despine: Despine adopted a deterministic approach close to positivism. He believed that offenders were “moral madmen” lacking free will and incapable of understanding ethical values.

Benedict Augustin Morel: Morel developed the theory of degeneration, which posited that criminals were individuals with hereditary and transmissible mental and physical stigmata. This theory influenced Lombroso’s work.

Anthropology: Criminal anthropology viewed offenders as belonging to a lower, degenerate, and morbid human subspecies. Its methods were similar to phrenology, involving the study of skulls.

Charles Darwin: Darwin’s work, particularly The Descent of Man, and his explanation of the struggle for survival in nature, where only the strongest survive (natural selection), influenced criminal anthropology. The main tenets of criminal anthropology were:

  • The offender is an unevolved species, an atavistic individual.
  • Crime is transmitted through heredity.
  • The deficiency must be corrected.

The Moral Statistics or Cartographic School

The Cartographic School can be considered the precursor to the Italian Positivist School. It viewed crime as a mass phenomenon, a social fact, and applied quantitative and statistical methods to its analysis. Its sociological examination of crime revealed four principles:

  1. Crime is a massive social phenomenon, not an isolated event. Therefore, the focus should be on the criminal structure rather than individual offenders.
  2. Crime is a surprisingly regular and constant phenomenon. It repeats with precision and timing, governed by social laws that researchers must discover. Crime will always exist at a minimum level due to the dynamics of society.
  3. The study of crime should involve not only its causes but also its quantification through statistics.
  4. Crime is a normal and inevitable phenomenon in society. Each society has an annual crime rate, just as it has birth and death rates. It is a normal, inevitable, necessary, and constant phenomenon. Because of its constant and regular volume, it is possible to accurately predict the type and number of future crimes.

The only appropriate method for investigating crime as a mass social phenomenon is statistics.

Key Figures:

Adolphe Quetelet: Quetelet conducted geographical studies of crime, developing moral statistics. He proposed measuring and classifying criminal types within specific areas to determine their causes and implement preventive measures. He argued that there was a statistical correlation between certain crimes and various factors such as climate, geographic location, illiteracy, and poverty.

His main contribution was the geographical study of crime, focusing on the location of offenses. For example, he might subdivide a region into different areas and investigate the crime rate in each area to develop targeted interventions.

Quetelet sought to identify factors influencing crime and focused on the influence of climate. He developed the thermal laws, establishing a correlation between climate and criminal behavior. He observed that:

  • Summer: More violent, passionate crimes.
  • Spring: Increase in sexual crimes.
  • Winter: Increase in property crimes.

Quetelet also studied the sex factor, determining that men offended more than women (a ratio of 6 to 1). Finally, he examined the age factor and concluded that most offenders were around 20 years old. This observation could still be relevant today, considering increased life expectancy.

According to the age factor:

  • Children: Household thefts.
  • Adolescence: Sex crimes.
  • Youth: More violent crimes.
  • Maturity: Crimes of fraud and cunning.
  • Aging: Crimes against property, sexual abuse.

Quantitatively, most offenses are committed during middle age, with the highest rates between 14-25 years for men and 16-27 for women.

André-Michel Guerry: Guerry was the founder of the French Cartographic School. He studied the geographical distribution of crime in France and introduced the use of statistics in the study of human phenomena, particularly crime. His main work was Essays on the Moral Statistics of France (1835). He established the following laws:

  • Geographical areas determine the causes of crime.
  • Northern France: More property crimes.
  • Southern France: More violent crimes against persons.

Peter Kropotkin: Kropotkin developed a formula for calculating the number of homicides per year: (average temperature + 7) x (average humidity x 2).