The University of Chicago Press

Adolphe Quetelet and the Origins of Positivist Criminology
Author(s): Piers Beirne

Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 92, No. 5 (Mar., 1987), pp. 1140-1169
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2779999 .
Accessed: 29/09/2013 17:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Adolphe Quetelet and the Origins
of Positivist Criminologyl
Piers Beirne
UniversityofSouthernMaine
This articleexaminesthe largelyunacknowledgedcontribution of

Adolphe Quetelet(1796-1874) to the originsof positivistcriminol-
ogy. Quetelet'slabors have previouslytendedto be misrepresented
eitheras a politicalprojectthat was an unmediatedexpressionof
stateand class interestsor as a discoursethatanticipatedthesubse-
quentmaturationofLombrosianismand theChicagoschoolofecol-
ogy.It is suggestedhere,instead,thatQuetelet'ssocialmechanicsof
crimeshouldproperlybe understoodin termsofitsemergencefrom
some of the focal concernsof the domainsof penalityand the sta-
tistical movementwhich, during the Restoration,coincided in
the issue of the regulationof the "dangerousclasses." This coinci-
dence informedQuetelet's ideas about the constancyof crime,
criminalpropensities,the causes of crime,the average man, and
social regulation.This articletentatively concludesthatQuetelet's
multifacetedanalysis of crime ultimatelyfostereda rigid binary
oppositionbetweennormality and deviationand providedtheepis-
temologicalcoreforthedominanceofbiologism,mentalhereditari-
anism,and economismin positivistcriminology.
Societyitselfcontainsthe germsof all the crimescom-

mitted.It is the social state,in some measure,thatpre-
paresthesecrimes,and thecriminalis merelytheinstru-
mentthatexecutesthem.[QUETELET 1835]
Duringthe formativeperiodof social science,AdolpheQueteletwas for

halfa centuryone of the mostinfluential figuresin Europe, thoughit is
onlyin astronomy,in statistics,and in meteorologythathis reputationas
1 This paper profited at

of theInstituteof Criminology
greatlyfromthe generosity
CambridgeUniversity, whichprovidedme witha visitingscholarshipin summer
1985. For theirencouragementand for theirhelpfulcriticismof an earlier version of
this paper, I am indebted to Susan CorrenteBeirne, David Garland, Guy Houchon,
Alan Hunt, Peter Lehman, Rosy Miller, Sawyer Sylvester,Ian Taylor, and the anony-
mous reviewersforAJS. Unless otherwiseindicated, all translationsfromthe French
are my own. Requests for reprintsshould be sent to Piers Beirne, Department of
Sociology, Universityof Southern Maine, Portland, Maine 04103.
?) 1987 by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved.

0002-9602/87/9205-0004$01.50
1140 AJS Volume 92 Number5 (March 1987): 1140-69

Quetelet
a pioneerand seminalthinkeris securelybeyonddoubt. Quetelet'sanaly-

sis of social organizationwas frequentlypressedintoservicefora broad
spectrumofpoliticaland ideologicalinterests:about his Sur l'homme(On
Man) of 1835,Marx wrotein theNew YorkDaily Tribunethatitwas "an
excellentand learnedwork"([1853] 1956,p. 229), and, ofthesame book,
Durkheimclaimedin Suicide thatits idea of thehommemoyen(average
man) embodied"a theory,moreover,whichhas remainedthe onlysys-
tematicexplanation[of]theremarkableregularity withwhichsocial phe-
nomenarepeatthemselvesduringidenticalperiodsoftime"([1897] 1951,
p. 300).2 The historianof science GeorgeSartonhas recordedthatSur
l'homme"was one of thegreatestbooks ofthenineteenth century"(1935,
p. 4) and that"a greatinjusticeis made whenComteis called thefounder
ofsociology,forQuetelethas betterclaimsto thistitlethanhe" (p. 14; see
also Landau and Lazarsfeld 1968).
My concernhereis not,though,withQuetelet'slargelyunheraldedrole
in the foundingof sociologyas such. That unfinished task is largerand
moreambitiousthanmine.In whatfollows,I restrict myselfto outlining
Quetelet'scontribution to theoriginsofpositivistcriminology.3 This con-
tribution,also, has never properly been acknowledged. The principal
biographiesof Quetelet(Mailly 1875; Hankins 1908; Lottin[1912] 1969)
werewrittennearly100 yearsago, and noneof themhas his criminology
as its explicitfocus.None of Quetelet'swritingson crimewas translated
fortheprestigiousseriesof European workspublishedbetween1911and
1918 underthe auspices of the AmericanInstituteof CriminalLaw and
Criminology.4 NeitherQuetelet nor any othermemberof the Franco-
Belgian school of criminologyof the 1830s was representedin Mann-
thatDurkheim's
2 Douglashas evensuggested onlyindegreefromthe
Suicidediffered
principles,methodology, and empiricalfindings of the moralstatisticiansand that
Quetelet'sSur l'hommewas "themostinfluential workof all . .
moral-statistical
(1967,p. 11; see also Giddens1965,pp. 3-4).
Fromtheoutset,letme admitthatI do notwishto debatetheputativeexistence of
somegenuine,correctdescription relativeto thestudyof crime.This
of "positivist"
termis nowadaysso frequently abused thatit tendsto be best understoodas an
epithet-a weapon-directedagainstthosewithwhomone has politicalor epis-
temological disagreement. Positivismhas severalforms,each ofwhich,accordingto
its contextand object,can be moreor less appropriate as a methodof inquiry.By
"positivist
criminology," I referlooselytoa discourseaboutcrimethatis predicated on
thebeliefthatthereis a fundamental harmony betweenthemethods ofthenaturaland
socialsciences,a discoursethatviewsitsobservational categoriesas theoryindepen-
dentand thatrequiresa specific formofempirical inquiryinsupportofitsargumenta-
tion.Such a description of positivismhas its limitations,of course,but it has the
singularmeritof beingtheone to whichQuetelethimself subscribed.
4 The ModernCriminalScienceSeriesincludedworksby de Quiros,Gross,Lom-
broso,Saleilles,Ferri,Tarde, Bonger,Garofalo,and Aschaffenburg.
1141

AmericanJournalof Sociology
heim's(1972) Pioneersin Criminology, an importantbiographicalcollec-

tion that containsessays on lesserfigures,such as Maconochie and de
Marsangy. Taylor, Walton, and Young's (1973, p. 37) celebratedThe
New Criminology refersbrieflyto Queteletbut thenonlyin termsof the
unsubstantiated assertionthat Queteletand his colleagueA. M. Guerry
largelyeffectedthe transitionin penologyfromfreewill to determinism
(see also Radzinowicz 1966, pp. 29-37). In the mostrecenthistoriesof
criminological theory(e.g., Gibbons 1979;Jacoby1979;Pelfrey1980),no
mentionat all is made of Quetelet.
The sustainedneglectof Quetelet'swork on crimecan in part be ex-
plained, somewhatironically,by the thrustof the cursoryrecognition
accordedhimby Americancriminologists in the 1930s.At thattime,two
specificclaims were made about his work. First,it was claimed (e.g.,
Lindesmithand Levin 1937, pp. 654-55; Sellin 1937) that Quetelet,
ratherthan Lombroso,had been responsiblefor rescuingthe studyof
crimefromthe mireof metaphysicsand elevatingit to the statusof a
science and, somewhatparadoxically,that the traditionestablishedby
Quetelet gave Lombroso's contemporariesboth the standardsand the
evidenceto criticizeand rejectatavisticideas of theborncriminal.5Sec-
ond, it was claimed (e.g., Elmer 1933; and see Morris1957, pp. 37-52)
thatQueteletand Guerrywerethefounders,or perhapstheprecursors, of
theecologicalschoolin crime.Both claimshave somemerit.It is true,for
example, that the strongestcriticsof Lombrosianism,such as Tarde,
Topinard, Manouvrier, and Lacassagne, marshaled their evidence
againsttheidea oftheborncriminalwithgeneralizations abouttheeffects
of the social environmenton criminality.It is also true that, in some
respects,Queteletand Guerryanticipatedtheworkofecologicaltheorists
a centurylater.However,bothclaimstendto ignorethehistoricalcontext
and thustheoriginality of Quetelet'sown analysisofcrime.The effectof
thefirstclaim was to characterizeQuetelet'sintervention in criminology
as merelypre-Lombrosian.The effectof the second claim was to make
Quetelet'simportancehingeon the success of the ecologicalmovement
thatmaturedin Chicago in the 1930s, and of which,in fact,Guerry-
ratherthan Quetelet-was usuallyidentified as the precursor(see Shaw
and McKay [1942],p. 5). Bothclaims,therefore, tendto renderQuetelet's
specificanalysisof crimeinvisibleor, at best, derivative.
My intentionhere,therefore, is chieflyto identifyQuetelet'sparticular
contributionto the rise of positivistcriminology.This I do by (1) an
5 The intellectualmaturationof Lombroso's idea of the born criminalhas been charted

in great detail by Wolfgang (1972). An excellent account of the "medicalization of
deviance" implicit in this idea, and also of the various oppositional currentsto it
(especially in France), is given by Nye (1984, pp. 97-131).
1142

Quetelet
outline of the historicalcontextof the genesis of Quetelet's oeuvre,

namely,theconjunctionoftheapparentfailureofFrenchpenal strategies
and the expansionin the scope of the statisticalmovementto include
empiricalsocial research;(2) a summaryof Quetelet'smethodof inquiry
and of thestructure and contentof his criminology;
and (3) an indication
of the controversial
receptionof his writings.Finally,I offera tentative
assessmentof Quetelet'splace in the developmentof positivistcriminol-
ogy.
PENALITY AND THE MORAL STATISTICS OF CRIME

Beforeproceedingto any detailedexhumationof Quetelet'scriminology,
it is useful to place the genesis of his oeuvre in its properhistorical
context.The emergenceof positivistcriminology in early 19th-century
France shouldinitiallybe understoodas an importanteffectofthetrans-
formation in penal strategiesthatoccurred,rapidlyin some spheresand
graduallyin others,betweenthemiddleof the 18thand thebeginningof
the 19thcenturies.Beforethistransformation, thereweretheamorphous
penal strategiesof theancienregime.These weredictatedby a discourse
couched in rhetoricabout the freelegal subject, the transgressions of
whom were dealt with by the infliction of brutalphysicalpunishment.
The spectrumof the new penal strategieshad at its centera networkof
carceralinstitutions inscribedwith Enlightenment rationalismand the
humanismof thephilosophes.These institutions weredevisedas mecha-
nismsofsurveillanceand wereintendedto act withthesame monotonous
precisionon theirindividualsubjectsas theschool,thebarracks,and the
monastery.6 Their growinginventory includedhospitals,asylums,work-
houses (depo6tsde mendicite'),reformatories, houses of correction,and
prisons.7 Their "delinquent" and "pathological" inmates comprised
6 In the Napoleonic era, these strategiesoperated in concertwith a new criminalcode

(with additional categories of delinquency), a professionalgendarmerie,a systemof
passport and identitycards, and an extensive networkof paid informersand spies
directed by the notorious Minister of Police, Fouche (Foucault 1979, p. 280; Stead
1983, pp. 47-48).
7 The modernprisonsystemwas inauguratedby imperialdecree in 1810. Althoughthe
socioeconomic characteristicsof the prison population were not collected in any sys-
tematicway until the 1870s, it is safe to assume that, until at least the 1850s, 80% of
prisonerswere young, unmarried males fromthe skilled or unskilled workingclass
(O'Brien 1982, pp. 54-61). Excluding militaryprisons (bagnes) and debtors' prisons,
the Restorationestablished at least fivecategoriesof prison, each based on a complex
classificationof inmates (see O'Brien 1982, pp. 3-51; Petit 1984). Strategically,the
prisons isolated delinquents from the law-abiding citizenry;the development of ag-
riculturalcolonies, transportation,and the galleys carried this strategyto its logical
extreme.
1143

syphilitics,alcoholics, idiots and eccentrics,vagabonds, immigrants,

libertines,prostitutes,and pettyand professionalcriminals;theirstated
objective was moral rehabilitationthroughthe deprivationof liberty.
This projecthas beenvariouslydescribedas "thepowerofnormalization"
(Foucault 1979, p. 308), "the fabricationof a reliableperson"(Treiber
and Steinert1980), and "the sequestrationof unreason"(Doerner 1981,
pp. 14-17).
Foucault (1980, pp. 47-49) has proposed,in passagesuncharacteristic-
ally redolentof instrumentalism, that positivistcriminology (of which
Queteletwas to be theleadingfigure)emergedin Francein the 1820sas a
calculated responseto the need for an officialand comprehensivedis-
coursethat could justifythesenew strategiesof penality.But thisview
assumes,a priori,an identity(or at least a complementarity) betweenthe
intentionsof those,like Quetelet,who constructedsuch a discourseand
tlieconsciousobjectivesof Frenchpenal policy.Even ifultimately true,
such an assumptiondoes littleto illuminatefor us eitherthe specific
contentofthisdiscourseor thetheoretical and conceptualmaneuversthat
wereto characterizethisperiodofitsadolescence.Whileit emergedfrom
the state and as a state practice,criminology was not an unmediated
expressionofstateor class interests.AgainstFoucault,it can be said that
positivistcriminology emergedfromtheintersection oftwohitherto unre-
lateddomainsofstateactivity.Fromthedomainofpenality,criminology
secured an institutionalposition,a measure of financialsupport,and
considerablepopularinterestin itspronouncements. Fromthedomainof
thestatisticalmovement,criminology acquireditsintellectualorientation
and recognition by the scientific
community of its major discursivetech-
niques. The manysitesofeach ofthese two domainswerealmostentirely
separate until, during the Restoration(1814-30), theycoincidedin a
commonissue. This issue was the apparentfailureto normalizethecon-
duct of the "dangerousclasses."8
That the new penal strategieshad significantly failed to do so was
apparentin threeways. First,it was implicitin the veryexistenceof a
largegroupof poor, semiproletarian thieves(les mise'rables)-a separate
nationwithintheFrenchnation-whose continuedpresenceamongthem
representeda fearfulaffrontto the sensibilitiesof the law-abiding
citizenry.Fregier(1840; see also Chevalier 1973, p. 448) estimatedthat
thesole meansofsupportfor30,000Parisianswas robbery;Balzac's Code
8 The
"dangerousclasses"(classesdangereuses)
was a termthatfirst appearedduring
theRestoration,althoughit was notpopularizeduntilFregier's(1840)classicstudyof
urbancriminality.Tombs(1980)providesa goodaccountofthestockmoralcategories
on whichthetermwas constructed and ofthewaysin whichit was ofteninvokedto
justifymilitary
repression.
1144

Quetelet
des genshonnetesrecordedthattherewere 20,000 professional criminals

and as many as 120,000 "rogues" in RestorationParis. To a certain
extent,the social visibilityof the dangerousclasses was an intractable
effectof the new demographiccompositionof RestorationFrance. This
was mostobviousin urbanareas such as Paris. Despite a doublingof its
populationin the half centuryafter1800, Paris remainedstructurally
intact.It is notdifficultto imaginehow quicklythisimmensepopulation
increase,in so relativelyshorta period,led to a far-reaching social deteri-
oration,which was manifestin the incidenceof infantmortalityand
problemsof sanitationand sewage, accommodation,foodsupplies,em-
ployment,public order,and crime.Accordingto Chevalier,the sudden
change in Paris's populationwas such that the city'sinabilityto adapt
itselfto itsnew compositionrelegateda largepartoftheworkingclass "to
the furthest confinesof the economy,of societyand almostof existence
itself,in material,moraland, basically,biologicalcircumstances condu-
cive to crime,of which crimeitselfwas a possibleconsequence"(1973,
p. 258).
The new prominenceofcrimein thedescription ofurbanlifein France
can be attributedto the fearof the criminality of the dangerousclasses
thatenduredat all levels of Frenchsocietythroughout the 19thcentury.
Chevalier(1973) depictsRestorationParis as a cityin whichthecitizenry
were engrossedin reportsof crimeas one of theirnormaldaily worries;
duringcertaincold wintersof destitution,the fear of crimeturnedto
panic and terror.Reportsof crimewere ubiquitouslyconveyedin news-
papers and eagerlydevouredby readers;in some cases, such as in the
sensationalaccountsofthepoliceinformer (and ex-thief)Vidocq and the
poet-banditLacenaire, fear was transformed into morbidfascination.
Hugo's Les Mise'rableswas a brilliantand typicalliteraryexampleof the
fearfulattitudetowardcrimein general;otherauthors,such as Balzac,
depictedthe fear of specificformsof crime,such as theftby domestic
servants.Popular melodramasabout crimewere regularlystagedin the
Boulevard du Temple. This widespreadfearof crimewas itselfexacer-
bated by working-classinsurrections, and, as Tombs (1980, p. 214) has
suggested,it quickly became an unquestionedtenet of middle-class
thoughtthatcrimeand revolutionwere symptomsof thesame disease.9
In thepublicconcernwithcrime,thecentrality ofthedangerousclasses
was fixedby two further facts.First,in 1815and forseveralyearsthere-
after,a suddenincreasewas recordedin therateof felonyoffenses.This
increase occurredprimarilyin theftand disturbancesof public order
9 In turn, this assumption led to extreme harshness on the part of juries-whose

compositionin the 19th centurywas thoroughlybourgeois in origin-toward those
accused of ordinarypropertycrimes (see Donovan 1981).
1145

(Wright1983, pp. 48-50; Duesterberg1979, pp. 29-31); between1813

and 1820 alone, the numberof convictionsin the criminaltribunals
nearlydoubled.10A secondand even moredecisivefactorwas theincreas-
ingratesof recidivism;theseimpliedthatthestatedrehabilitative object
of thecarceralinstitutions to knowwhat degree
had failed.It is difficult
ofaccuracycan be attributedto thefiguresofrecidivismbefore1835,but
thepublicityabout themwas rampant,and theygeneratedmuchindigna-
tion. Indeed, about the recidivismrate in the mid 1820s,the statistical
organof theMinistryofJusticelaterstressedthat"[itwas] withoutcon-
tradictionthe mostimportantpart of the Comptebecause it revealsthe
inefficacy of repressionand theinadequacyof punishment" (Comptegen-
eral 1882, p. 83). Accordingto othercontemporary accounts,therateof
recidivismbetween1828and 1834was 21% or moreofthoseconvictedof
crimesduringthis time; before 1831, 38% of those who had leftthe
maisonscentraleswere convictedagain, as were 33% of thosesentenced
to convictships(Foucault 1979,p. 265; Duesterberg1979,p. 89). During
theJulyMonarchy(1830-48), the recidivismrateswere as highas 45%
(Wright1983, p. 50).
That the carceral institutions had failed to normalizethe dangerous
classes was thereforeconfirmed,at least for a fearfuland fascinated
public,bytherisingratesofcrimeand recidivismduringthefirstyearsof
the Restoration."In 1820 it was alreadyunderstood,"writesFoucault,
"thattheprisons,farfromtransforming criminalsintocitizens,serveonly
to manufacturenew criminalsand drive existingcriminalsever deeper
intocriminality" (1980, p. 40). This failurewas theessentialconditionfor
the appearance of a vast corpus of studies, instigatedboth by state
bureaus and by private researchers,that sought to uncover the vital
statisticsofthedangerousclasses."1It had been understoodsincethe 16th
10 These increases in recorded criminalitycan be explained in part by the turbulent

transitionto peace afterNapoleon's finalmilitarydefeatin 1815. During the 1820s, the
Comptege'ne'ralrecordeda decrease in the crimerate, and thisofficialrecordis gener-
ally supported by Lodhi and Tilly (1973) and Tilly, Tilly, and Tilly (1975). However,
Zehr (1976) has more persuasivelyargued thatthe decliningofficialrate was deceptive
because of the increasingtendencyof prosecutorsnot to follow throughon reportsof
crime and for propertycrimes to be tried in lower courts as misdemeanors-trends
later identifiedand condemned by Tarde (1886, pp. 61-121). Combining data from
correctionaland assize courts, Zehr (1976, pp. 34-43, 146 n. 11) reveals a significant
increase in all indices of propertycrime except arson.
" Among the vital conditionsof the population now subject to regularstate scrutiny
were mortality,age, occupation, disease, and indigence. At the suggestion of the
administrationprefectoraleof the Seine, supportedby the Ministryof the Interiorand
administeredby Fourier, the disseminationof these data was institutionalizedin 1821
in theRecherchesstatistiquesde la ville de Paris. On the "openingup" of the statistical
movement during the Restoration, see Faur6 (1918, pp. 289-91), Chevalier (1973,
pp. 29-69), and Porter (1985).
1146

Quetelet
centurythatthesurveillanceand exposureofcriminalscouldbe servedby

enumeration,but it was not untilthisprecisejuncturethatthe applica-
tionof numericalanalysisto penalityachievedthe statusof an accepted
sciencewhoseobjectwas thestructured orderofobservablefacts:"Facts,
based upon direct observationand preferablyexpressednumerically,
would decide all questions"(Coleman 1982, p. 123).12 Statisticalinquiry
into the dangerousclasses began with the circumscribed populationof
prisoners.Several quasi-governmental, philanthropic, and religiousor-
ganizationsbegan to investigateprisonconditionswiththe intentionof
rejuvenatingthemoralhealthof theprisoners.In 1819,forexample,the
Socie'te'royale pour l'ame'liorationdes prisons reportedon such items
as the quality of prison construction,diet, clothing,bedding, and
infirmaries. The factualinformation providedby theseorganizations was
supplementedby the inquiriesof independentinvestigatorsfromthe
publichealth(hygienepublique)movement,theleadingfiguresof which
includedde Chateauneuf,Parent-Duchatelet, and Villerme.In 1820,Vil-
lerme'sDes prisons,forexample,pointedto thestatisticallinksbetween
gruesomeprisonconditions,moraldegradation,and recidivism;incarcer-
ation itself,in otherwords,was now thoughtto increasethe size of that
sectionof the dangerousclasses that was continuallyshuttledbetween
civil societyand prison.
In mostoftheinquiriesintoprisonconditions,one questionwas invari-
ably present:"Should (or could) theprisonersbe returnedto societyand,
ifso, how?" (Petit1984,p. 137). The resolutionofthisquestioncould not
be obtained,it was soon realized,withinformation derivedexclusively
fromthefactsaboutprisonconditions.Froma narrowfocuson theprison
population,then,theinquirysoon broadenedto considerthelargerpopu-
lationthatpassed throughsuccessivelayersof theadministration ofjus-
tice. Withinthis broaderinquirythe most importantdevelopmentoc-
curredin 1825, the year that the Ministryof Justiceinitiatedthe first
nationalstatisticaltables on crime,the annual Comptege'ne'ral de l'ad-
ministrationde la justice criminelleen France. The Comptewas first
publishedin 1827 underthe efficient directionof Guerryde Champneuf
(directorof criminalaffairs)and Arondeau (departmenthead in the
12 Priorto the Restoration,

the nascentstatisticalmovementhad been discredited
becauseofitsuse as a nakedinstrument ofpoliticalsurveillance,
especiallybetween
theReignofTerrorand theend oftheempire.According to Chevalier(1973,p. 49),
thecensusandsimilarstateprojectswerecommonly regarded as thinly
veiledattempts
bythepolicetoidentifysuspects;theveryannouncement ofa censusunleasheda wave
ofdenunciations.On theprofessionaland institutional
setbacksofthestatistical
move-
mentpriorto the Restoration, see Westergaard (1932, pp. 114-16) and Perrotand
Woolf(1984);on its insulationfrommathematical theoryuntiltheRestoration, see
Porter(1985).
1147

Ministryof Justice),immediatelyaftera winterin which the rates of

crimeand death increasedequally and duringwhich public fear and
terrorthroughout Paris werethemainthemesofpolicereportsand news-
paper articles(Chevalier 1973, p. 3). The Comptewas drawn up from
quarterlyreturnspreparedby public prosecutorsin everydepartement.
These wereitemized,uniformly printed,and checkedforaccuracybythe
chiefadministrator of criminalprosecutorsin Paris. The tables in the
Compteweredividedintofourparts:thefirstincludedall prosecutions in
the assize courts;the second, the verdictsof correctionaltribunals;the
third,the verdictsof the tribunalsof the police courts;and the fourth,
statisticalinformation about thecriminalprocessfromotherjurisdictions
suchas theroyalcourts.For each departement, theComptemeasuredthe
annual numberof known and prosecutedcrimesagainst personsand
property, whethertheaccused (ifprosecuted)wereacquittedor convicted
as well as the punishmentaccorded the latter;additionally,it began to
recordthetimeof yearwhentheseoffenseswerecommitted and theage,
sex, occupation,and educationalstatusof both accused and convicted.
Information about repeatoffenders became moreand moredetailedwith
each successive year of publication,and new tables were constantly
added on thecorrelations betweenthenatureof offensesand thecharac-
teristicsof the accused.13
Both theMinistryofJusticeand a groupofsocial statisticians believed
thatthedata, or "facts,"in thesetablescould one day be used to perfect
legislationin civil and moral matters.In his introductionto the first
volumeof the Compte,MinisterofJusticeComtede Peyronnetdeclared
that"theexact knowledgeof factsis one of thefirstneeds of our formof
government; them;it givesthema
it enlightensdeliberations;it simplifies
solidfoundationbysubstituting thepositivevisionand reliabilityofexpe-
rienceforthevaguenessoftheories"(Compte1827,p. x). The dissemina-
tionof the Comptewas quicklyfollowedby the labors of a looselyknit,
somewhatamateurmovementof moralstatisticians, whichincludedthe
Parisian lawyerand social cartographer A. M. Guerry;the statisticians
Villerme,d'Angeville,and d'Ivernois;the Italian geographerBalbi; and
the youngBelgian astronomerQuetelet.It is to Quetelet'simmersionin
thismovementthatI now turn.14
13
The various deposits into and the infrequentwithdrawalsfromthe Comptebetween
1827 and the 1880s are chronicledby Perrot(1975, pp. 70-81).
14 The reader should be made aware that, in the following account of Quetelet's
criminology,virtuallyno referencewill be made to any of his writingsafter 1848,
includinghis widely acclaimed Physique sociale (1869). Despite Quetelet's continued
propensityto publish, his work after 1848 contains no departures from his earlier
analyses of crime; indeed, as Quetelet himselflater recorded,"In publishingthe first
edition of my Physique sociale, in 1834 and 1835, I believed it necessary to give a
1148

Quetelet
QUETELET AND THE SOCIAL MECHANICS OF CRIME

At the age of 23, Queteletreceiveda doctoratein sciencefromthe new
University of Ghent.His 1819dissertation,writtenundertheguidanceof
Jean Garnier,a notedprofessorof astronomyand highermathematics,
was an importantand widely acclaimed contribution to the theoryof
conic sections.One of Garnier'scolleagues went so far as to compare
Quetelet'sdiscoveryof a new curvewithPascal's discoveryof a cycloid
(Hankins 1908,p. 455). Laterin thesameyear,Queteletwas appointedto
a chairin mathematicsat the BrusselsAthenaeum.In quick succession,
he was, in 1820, elected to and at once revived the moribundRoyal
Academyof Sciences in Brussels,servedas editor,withGarnier,of the
influentialCorrespondancemathematiqueet physique, and helped to
createtheliberal(and soon-to-besuppressed)SocieteBelgepourla propa-
gationde l'instructionet de la morale. Quetelet'sTraitepopulaired'as-
tronomie,falselyrumoredto have been placed on the Catholic Index
LibrorumProhibitorum, contributedto thespreadthroughout Europe of
populareducationin astronomy.
Social Mechanicsand the AverageMan

These earlyachievementsoftheyoungQueteletin astronomy and mathe-
maticsservedas intellectualpreparationforhis seminalcontributionto
thenew discourseof social mechanics(mecaniquesociale). The opportu-
nityforthiswas providedby the Royal Academy,which,in 1823, sent
himto Paris to studyastronomicalapparatuseswitha view-vague and
oftenpostponed-toward erectingan observatoryin Brussels.'5It was
special place to criminal statistics.I have found, to a strikingdegree, the most con-
spicuous proof of the confirmationof my ideas about the size and the constancyof
social regularities.. . . Today I do not thinkthat I have to change any of my conclu-
sions" (1869, p. 269). Hankins has noted that, afterQuetelet suffereda strokein 1855,
his writings"needed the most thoroughrevision.... His books published after1855,
in so far as [they are] new in composition, are full of ambiguous or unintelligible
phrases, ill-arranged and very repetitious" (1908, pp. 473-74). Actually, repeti-
tiousnesshad set in well beforethe date marked by Hankins; forexample, except for
the addition of some paragraphs on suicides and dueling, Quetelet's (1842) Treatise on
Man merelyrepeatsthecontentofResearchon thePropensityfor
Crimeat Different
Ages ([1831a] 1984). Moreover, the sections on crime in Physique sociale (1869) only
reiteratework published threedecades earlier ([1831a] 1984, 1835); the titlewas but a
reversal of the titleand subtitleof Sur l'homme(1835), and even the introductionto
Physique sociale, by the English astronomerSir John Herschel, had previouslyap-
peared in the Edinburgh Review in 1850.
15 This was a difficultperiod foremigreBelgian intellectuals,marked as it was by the
effectivesubmission of Belgium to Franco-Dutch rule and the cultural dominance of
the French intelligentsia. Quetelet's interest in social mechanics was probably
1149

duringhis monthsin Paris on this missionthat Queteletwas firstin-

troducedby theastronomers Bouvard and Humboldtto variouscurrents
in thestatisticalmovement(see Quetelet1871).FromtheGermanadmin-
istrativeStatistik,fromthe Frenchsocial reformism of Condorcetand
Turgot (among others),and fromthe English political"state-istics"of
Grauntand Petty,he learnedof the generalpotentialfortheapplication
of enumerationto social matter(matieresociale). From Malthus'sEssay
on Population, Villerme'sDes prisons,Fourier'sstatisticalresearchon
Paris and its environsin the early 1820s,and, above all, fromthe work
of his friendand mentor,Laplace, on celestialmechanics(mecanique
celeste),on the principlesof probabilistictheory,and on the methodof
least squares, Queteletlearned how to apply algebra and geometryto
demographictables.'6 On his returnto Belgium fromParis in 1824,
Queteletengagedin a varietyof projects.His firststatisticalwork(1826)
utilizedBelgian birthand mortality tables as the basis forthe construc-
tionof insurancerates. Soon thereafter, he publishedstudiesin physics,
astronomy,and mathematics,furnisheda commentary on Dutch demo-
graphicpolicies,and submittedplans in Belgiumfora nationalcensus
and the collectionof crimestatistics.
In theseearlyworks,Queteletattemptedto reveal thatthe same law-
like,mechanicalregularity thathad been determined to existin theheav-
ens and in the world of naturealso existedin the world of social facts
(faitssociaux). "In followingattentivelythe regularmarchof naturein
the developmentof plants and animals," Quetelet reasoned, "we are
compelledto believein theanalogue thattheinfluenceoflaws shouldbe
extendedto thehumanspecies"(1826, p. 495). The identification ofsuch
laws in thesocial worldwas dependenton statisticalcalculation:"We can
assess how perfected a sciencehas becomebyhow muchor how littleit is
intensified bytheBelgiannationalist movement, butthereis no compelling evidence

thathe was activein eitherBelgianor Frenchpolitics.However,he frequently com-
mentedon theprofessional hardshipsforhimself and forhismanyproteges brought on
bythe1830revolution (see Porter1985,p. 58).
16 It is verytempting to suggestthatthegeneraldirection forsocial-scientific
analysis
had beengleanedbyQueteletfromwriters suchas Saint-Simon and theyoungComte.
Butno references toeitherappearedinanyofhisearlyworks.The absenceofComteis
especiallypuzzling,and, althoughLottin(1912,pp. 356-67) correctly pointsto the
fundamental differences betweenthem,it is difficult
to believethatQuetelethad not
beeninfluenced by workssuchas Comte'sPlan des travauxscientiJfiques necessaires
pourre'organiser la socie'te'
(1822).PossiblyunderFourier'sguidance,Queteletadopted
Comte'stermphysiquesocialeas thesubtitleofhisSur l'homme (1835).Later,in his
Coursde philosophiepositive,Comteprotestedthe usurpationof the disciplineof
socialphysicsby"a Belgianscholarwhohas adoptedit,inrecentyears,as thetitleofa
workwhoseconcernis merelysimplestatistics" (1838,p. 15).Thusdid Queteletforce
Comteto inventtheneologism"sociology."
1150

Quetelet
based on calculation"(Quetelet 1828, p. 230). This ambitiousproject

Quetelettermedsocial mechanics(later,in 1835, social physics),and he
identified not inexactitudein methodbut insufficiency of empiricaldata
as the chiefobstacle to its realization.Human forceswere notoriously
susceptibleto the influenceof "secularperturbations"; onlya verylarge
numberof empiricalobservationscould reducethe perturbing effectof
variationin a particulardatumand therebydisclosetheaggregatenature
of social regularities.
At first,Queteletsoughttheseregularities in relativelyuncomplicated
data thatweresubjectto predictablevariationand thatcouldbe observed
directly:mortality rates,the heightsof 100,000Frencharmyconscripts,
and thechestmeasurements of5,738 Scottishsoldiers.Fromhis observa-
tions,Quetelet(1826, 1829; see also [183la] 1984,pp. 3-11; 183 lb; 1842,
pp. 57-72) calculated the average weightand heightof his subjects,
cross-tabulated thesewithsex, age, occupation,and geographicalregion,
and thensubmittedthesecorrelationsto the perturbational influenceof
such factorsas "the difficulties,toils and privationsexperiencedin in-
fancy,youthand infirmity." The average value of any given scale was
thoughtby Quetelet to be more accurate, the greaterthe numberof
empiricalobservations.In combination,theseaverage values produced
an image of a fictitious,statisticallyderived creaturewhom Quetelet
termedthe average man. "If the averageman were ascertainedforone
nation,he would presentthe typeof that nation. If he could be ascer-
tained accordingto the mass of men, he would presentthe typeof the
humanspecies altogether"([1831a] 1984, p. 3). The average man there-
foreoccupieda place amongall menthatQueteletenvisagedas analogous
to the centerof gravityin matter.His calculationof physicalaverages
was undertakenas preparationforthe extensionof social mechanicsto
thevitalphenomenaofmoralstatistics,namely,to suicide,marriage,and
crime.1
The Constancyof Crime

Queteletclaimedthatthe enumerationof the vital phenomenaof moral
statisticswas morecomplexthanthe measurementof nonvital,physical
17 Accordingto Durkheim(1897, p. 300 n. 1), the founderof moralstatistics was

PastorSussmilch.AmongtheFranco-Belgian statisticians,
it was mostlikelyGuerry
who firstappliedthetermto thephenomenaof crime.ContraLottin(1912,p. 37),
Queteletfirst
explicitly appliedit to hisown workin 1842(1842,pp. 79-80);here,he
urgedthatmoralstatistics be expandedto includewitchcraft practices,torture,
and
executionforreligiousreasons,as wellas politicaland religious
fanaticism ofvarious
sorts.To theseitems,Quetelet(1869,pp. 232-368)lateradded intellectual faculties,
mentalillness(alienation), alcoholism,dueling,and accidentaldeath.
1151

items.Vital phenomenawere morecomplexnot onlyin theirindividual

identitiesand therefore in theircomparability
but also, and moreimpor-
tant,because theyemanatedfrom"certainforceswhich[man]has at his
commandfromhis freewill" (Quetelet[1831a] 1984, p. 3). Because hu-
man actionis volitionalbehavior,Queteletsuggestedthatit is reasonable
to supposethatthevolumeofcrimewould varyfromone yearto another
accordingto human caprice. This would especiallyseem to be true of
unpremeditated crimes-murders,forexample,committedin a quarrel
or in fortuitouscircumstances.However, Queteletimmediatelywarns
that to argue that the human species is not subject to laws "would be
moreoffensive to the divinitythantheveryresearchwhichwe intendto
do" ([1831a] 1984, p. 5).
This metaphysicalassertionwas firstelaborated by Queteletin his
memoire,Researchon thePropensityfor Crimeat Different Ages([183la]
1984). While being carefulto pointout thatsocial mechanicscan never
pretendto discoverlaws thatcan be verifiedforisolatedindividuals,he
statesthat-when observedindirectly on a greatscale throughtheprism
of statisticalartifactssuch as the Compte-the phenomenaof crime
neverthelessresemblethe patternedbehaviorof physicalphenomena.18
This insight,as we shall see, was to cause Quetelet'scontemporaries
considerablediscomfort. Indeed, Quetelethimselfwarnedthat"thisway
of lookingat the social systemhas somethingpositiveabout it which
must,at first,frighten certainminds. Some will see in it a tendencyto
in
materialism.Others, interpreting my ideas badly, will findtherean
exaggeratedpretention to aggrandizethedomainoftheexactsciencesand
to place the geometrician in an elementwhichis not his own. They will
reproachme forbecominginvolvedin absurd speculationswhile being
occupied with things which are not susceptibleto being measured"
([1831a] 1984, p. 4). Quetelet'sunderstandingof the data in the Compte
reveals considerablesophisticationforhis era. Followingde Candolle's
(1830) short treatiseon criminalstatistics,Quetelet argues that any
18
Queteletwas thefirstmoralstatistician
to suggestthisresemblance, althoughhis
prioritywas disputedby A. M. Guerry.Therewas considerable personalanimosity
betweenQueteletand Guerry,an exampleof whichappearsat theend of thethird
bookofA Treatiseon Man, whichwas directedagainstGuerry's Essai surla statis-
tiquemoralede la France (1833). Here, Queteletwritesabout his discovery of the
constancyof crime:"As thisidea has continually presenteditselfto me in all my
researcheson man,and,as I haveexactlyexpresseditinthesametermsas thoseofthe
text,in my conclusionson theRecherchessur le penchantau crime,a workthat
appeareda yearbeforethatofA. M. Guerry,I have thought it necessaryto mention
thepointhere,to preventmisunderstanding" (1842,p. 96). See also Quetelet's(1842,
commentthatGuerrypaid insufficient
p. 79) unnecessary attention to documentary
sources.
1152

Quetelet
scientificanalysis of crime must assume "a relationshipprettynearly

invariablebetweenoffenses knownandjudged and theunknownsumtotal
ofoffenses committed" ([183la] 1984,p. 17). The size ofthisrelationship,
he suggested,would depend on the seriousnessof offensesand on "the
activityofjusticein reachingtheguilty,on thecarewhichtheselatterwill
take in hidingthemselves,and on the repugnancewhichwrongedindi-
viduals will feelin complaining,or on the ignorancein whichtheyper-
haps will be concerningthe wrong which has been done to them"
(Quetelet[1831a] 1984, p. 18). Queteletargued that, if the causes that
influencethisrelationshipremainthe same, thentheirrepresentation in
officialstatisticswould remain constant;in a later studyin Belgium,
Quetelet([1848a] 1984, pp. 19-20; see also Houchon 1976,p. 25) found
a constantrelationshipbetween crimesknown and crimessubject to
judicial prosecutionbetween1833 and 1839. That the ratioof unknown
crimesto recordedcrimeswas, in practice,constantQueteletinferred
fromtheastonishingregularity in thecrimeratesbetween1826and 1829
(see table 1).
In addition to the constancyin the annual numberof accused and
convictedand in theratiosofaccused to convicted,ofaccused to inhabit-
ants, and of crimeagainstpersonsto crimesagainstproperty,Quetelet
also pointsto regularitiesin thenumberof accused who failedto appear
in the tribunals,in the numberof convictionsin different typesoftribu-
nals, and in the numberof convictssentencedto death,confinement, or
forcedlabor for a term. Even the different methodsof murderwere
shown to be constantfromone year to another.He therefore concludes
that
onepassesfromoneyeartotheotherwiththesad perspective ofseeingthe
samecrimes reproducedinthesameorderandbringing withthemthesame
penaltiesinthesameproportions. ofthehumanspecies!The
Sad condition
shareofprisons,chains,andthescaffold appearsfixed
withas muchproba-
as therevenues
bility ofthestate.Weareabletoenumerate inadvancehow
manyindividuals willstaintheirhandswiththebloodoftheirfellowcrea-
tures,howmanywillbe forgers, howmanypoisoners, pretty
nearlyas one
can enumerate in advancethebirthsand deathswhichmusttakeplace.
[Quetelet(183la) 1984, p. 69]
CriminalPropensitiesand the Causes of Crime

The apparentconstancyof crimeratesrecordedin the Comptesuggested
to Queteletthat,whateverthe idiosyncrasies
of humanagency,criminal
behaviorobeyedlaws ofthesame orderas thosethatregulatethemotion
of inanimateobjects. The disproportionateand relentlesspresenceof
certaincategoriesin theComptebetween1826and 1829also indicatedto
Queteletthatyoungmales,thepoor,theless educated,and thosewithout
1153

O ~u t~~O 00
? 3 - -
00 C4 C00 cl)
00000Z)000 ce
00 ~ ~ 0
00~~~~~~~~~ Z
0 i~~~~~~~~~O
C,, 'ICm%
C)
00 'C O(n CO
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
uQ0z
?0 oo, o C' oexe
~00 t-
0 -o-4- -
00 oo. C, O- 0
H cn

Quetelet
employment or in lowlyoccupationshad a greaterpropensity (penchant)

thanothersto commitcrimesand to be convictedof them.19These data
seemed to enable Queteletto take issue with several conventionalac-
countsof the factorsthat precipitatedcrime.In particular,he adduced
thatneitherthe presenceof povertynorthe absence of formaleducation
warrantedthemonolithic causal importancecommonlyclaimedforthem.
Againstthose who assertedthe inevitableassociationof povertywith
crime,Quetelet([1831a] 1984, pp. 37-38; 1842, p. 89) pointedout that
some of thepoorestareas in France (e.g., Creuse)and in theLow Coun-
tries(e.g., Luxembourg)had among the lowestcrimerates;both areas
also had among the highestrates of illiteracy.Far more influentiala
factorthan absolute povertywas the perturbingeffectof inequalityin
wealth. Where great richesare amassed by a few, when an economy
suddenlyfluctuates, and whenthousandsofindividualspass rapidlyfrom
well-beingto misery,"These are theroughalternations fromone stateto
anotherthatgive birthto crime,especiallyifthosewho sufferfromthem
are surroundedbysubjectsoftemptation and findthemselvesirritated by
the continualview of luxuryand of an inequalityof fortunewhichdis-
heartensthem"(Quetelet[183la] 1984, p. 38). Moreover,againstthose
who arguedthatthe growthof public educationweakenedcriminalpro-
pensities,Queteletdisclosedthat thosewith higher"intellectualstates"
tendedto commitcrimesofa relativelymoreviolentnature,suchas rape
and murder.It was thusan errorto suppose thata countrywould have
fewercrimessimplybecause more childrenare sent to school thereor
because moreofthepopulationis literate;thedepartments withthelow-
est literacyrates,forexample,tendedto have onlyaverage crimerates.
However, to those who inferredfromthis that public education was
potentiallyharmfulto society(see Porter1985, p. 55), Queteletpointed
out that,among the educated, the mosteducated did not commitrela-
tivelymorecrimes.It was not, therefore, educationas such thataltered
the propensityto crimebut the type of educationand the presenceor
absence of "moralinstruction" (Quetelet[1831a] 1984, p. 37).
For Quetelet,thedata in theCompteimpliedthatthetwo factorsmost
prominently associated withcriminalpropensitieswere age and sex. In
table 2, he tabulatedcrimesaccordingto the ages of theirperpetrators
19 It is important
to notethatQuetelet'sinferences
aboutcriminalpropensitieswere
drawnexclusively fromthedataintheCompteor,as criminologists
fromGoring(1913)
onwardwould say, froma single-celldesign.While Quetelet(e.g., [1831a] 1984,
pp. 53, 58) was aware of the need to comparethe social characteristics of the
population intheComptewiththoseofthegeneralpopulation,itwas a comparison he
nevermade. Moreover,Quetelet'srepresentation oftheobstaclesto sucha compari-
son-and ofitssignificancecoulditbe made-was consistentlyconfined to a method-
ologicalratherthana theoretical
realm.
1155

TABLE 2
AGE AND THE PROPENSITY FOR CRIME, 1826-1829
Crimes
against Degrees
Crimesagainst Property Population of the
out of according Propensity
Age Persons Property 100 Crimes to Ages forCrime
Under 16 ......... 80 440 85 3,304 161

16-21 ............ 904 3,723 80 887 5,217
21-25 ............ 1,278 3,329 72 673 6,846
25-30 ............ 1,575 3,702 70 791 6,671
30-35 ............ 1,153 2,883 71 732 5,514
35-40 ............ 650 2,076 76 672 4,057
40-45 ............ 575 1,724 75 612 3,757
45-50 ............ 445 1,275 74 549 3,133
50-55 ............ 288 811 74 482 2,280
55-60 ............ 168 500 75 410 1,629
60-65 ............ 157 385 71 330 1,642
65-70 ............ 91 184 70 247 1,113
70-80 ............ 64 137 68 255 788
80 and over ....... 5 14 74 55 345
SOURCE.-Quetelet ([183la] 1984, p. 56).
and dividedthenumberofcrimesby thepopulationin therespectiveage

groups. Results show the propensityfor committingcrime at various
ages. This propensityis at its weakest at both extremesof life-in in-
fancy,neitherstrengthnor passion ("thosetwo powerfulinstruments of
crime")is at all developed,and, in old age, theirintensity
is restricted
by
the "dictatesof reason." The propensityforcrimeis at its strongestbe-
tweenthe ages of 21 and 25-when strengthand passions are mostin-
tense,and when reasonis insufficiently developedto restraintheircom-
bined influence.Queteletperceivesa cyclicalpatternin his age-specific
"steps in the career of crime" betweeninfancyand old age: physical
immaturity allows onlyforcrimessuch as indecentassault and rape in
whichthevictimofferslittleresistance;theage ofdispassionatereflection
seeks moreorganizedcrimessuch as theftson thepublichighways,mur-
der by poisoning,and acts of rebellion;finally,usingthe littlestrength
thatnaturehas lefthim, the elderlycriminaluses a depravedtreachery
"to strikehis enemyin the shadow" throughcrimessuch as forgery and
child molestation.
Queteletnotes(see table 3) that,between1826and 1829,therewere23
womenforevery100 men who appeared beforecriminaltribunals.He
1156

Quetelet
TABLE 3
SEX AND THE PROPENSITY FOR CRIME, 1826-1829
CRIMES AGAINST CRIMES AGAINST

PERSONS PROPERTY
YEAR Men Women Relationship Men Women Relationship
1826 ......... 1,639 268 .16 4,073 1,008 .25

1827 ......... 1,637 274 .17 4,020 998 .25
1828 ......... 1,576 270 .17 4,396 1,156 .26
1829 ......... 1,552 239 .15 4,379 1,203 .27
Average ... 1,601 263 .16 4,217 1,091 .26
SOURCE.-Quetelet ([1831a] 1984, p. 47).
suggeststhatone could therefore supposethatmale criminalpropensities

wereroughlyfourtimesgreaterthanthoseof women.But thesepropen-
sitiesdo notinformus, Queteletwarns,about thediffering seriousnessof
thecrimescommittedby each sex. Quetelettherefore notesthattheratio
of womento men accused of propertycrimeswas 26:100 but, forcrimes
againstpersons,was only16:100. Assumingthelatterto be moreserious
than crimesagainstproperty,QueteletconcludesthatFrenchmen were
at least fourtimes more "criminal"than French women. In tryingto
explainthedifference in criminality betweenFrenchmenand women,he
arguedthatthecommissionofany crimerequiresthebringing together of
a will(whichdependson morality), an opportunity,and theabilityto act.
Queteletpositedthe will of womenas moremotivatedby thesentiments
of shame and modestythan thatof men. Such an understanding of will
would explainnotonlywomen'slowerpropensity to crimein generalbut
also theirhigherindulgencein infanticide."As to infanticide,not only
does a woman have moreopportunities to commitit thana man, butshe
is in somewaysoftenpushedintoit byhardshipand almostalwaysbythe
desireto hide a mistakeand escape the shame and contemptof society,
whichspares the man more in similarcircumstances"(Quetelet[1831a]
1984, p. 49). Moreover,women have less opportunity to commitcrime
because theylead more retiring,less passionatelives and are less often
excited by alcohol; theirlesser abilityto act derivesfromtheirlesser
strength in comparisonwiththatof menand is reflected, forexample,in
theirdifferential
rate of parricide.20
20Women'slack of visibility of thelenientattitude

in the Comptewas a reflection
towardthemin the courtsthroughout the 19thcentury;womenwere moreoften
abletopleadmitigating
successfully andwererarely
circumstances sentenced todeath.
On thedifficult
explanatoryproblemsthatsuchleniencyraises,see Perrot(1975).
1157

In his firststudiesof crime,Queteletwas cautiousin drawingspecific

causal inferencesfromtheregularities manifestin theComptebecause,he
lamented,"The causes which influencecrimeare so enormousand so
diverse,thatit becomesalmostimpossibleto assignto each its degreeof
importance"(Quetelet[1831a] 1984, p. 37). Nevertheless,againstthose
who employedeclectic ideas of causality,Quetelet suggestedthat the
manycauses ofcrimecan be dividedintothreeprincipalcategories(1846,
pp. 157-256). First,thereare accidentalcauses, to whichno probability
can be assignedand whichare manifested fortuitouslyand are indifferent
in theirdirection.Examples of theseincludewars, famines,and natural
disasters. Quetelet understandstheir influencewithin a teleological
schema and confinesit to "the orderof successionof events." Second,
thereare variable causes, such as freewill and personality,that can
oscillatebetweengreateror smallerlimits.These causes act in a continu-
ous manner,althoughsome variable causes such as climateand the sea-
sons operate only periodically.The intensityand directionof variable
causes change as a resultof eitherdeterminedlaws or theirabsence.
Finally, there are constantcauses, such as age, sex, occupation,and
religion.These causes have a fixedprobabilityand act in a continuous
mannerwiththe same intensity and in the same direction;evidencefor
the predominanceof thisthirdcausal categorywas adduced by Quetelet
fromtheconstancyof crimerates.Quetelet'sinsertionof criminalbehav-
iorintoa formalstructure ofcausalitywas a remarkableadvance overthe
ad hoc, eclecticspeculationsof his contemporaries.Even more signifi-
cant,withinthisformalstructure, is theshiftofhis analysisto a different
level, whichallows himto claim that,because crimeis a constant,inevi-
table featureof social organization,it was society,France, or thenation
itselfthat caused crime.Thus, "Every social statepresupposes,then,a
certainnumberand a certainorderof crimes,these being merelythe
necessaryconsequencesof its organization"(Quetelet1842, p. 6). Again,
"The crimeswhichare annuallycommittedseemto be a necessaryresult
ofour social organization.... Societypreparescrime,and theguiltyare
onlythe instruments by which it is executed"(p. 108). Logic aside and
withthe considerableadvantagesof hindsight,it can perhapsbe argued
that Quetelet'sintuitionthat societycaused crimemarkeda profound
theoreticaldeparturefromthe crude realismof public opinion,classical
jurisprudence,and thecriminalcode and flewin thefaceoftheidea that
criminalsfreelychose to engage in wickedness.But, because Quetelet's
conceptof social organizationwas based on the idea of societyas an
aggregateof individuals,his projectionsabout thecausal nexusbetween
social organizationand crimeand of the way in which propensitiesto
crimeweretranslatedintocriminalactionsremainedthoroughly conven-
tional.To understandthisaspectof his work,we mustreturnto his idea
1158

Quetelet
of the average man and the way in which,especiallyduringthe 1840s,

thisconceptinfiltrated
his discourseon criminality.
The AverageMan and Social Regulation

In his work of the 1820s and early 1830s, as we have seen, Quetelet
determinedthe average values of the human physiqueand correlated
thesewithsuch variablesas age and sex, withtheresultbeinga descrip-
tionof the bodilycharacteristics of the average man in a givenpopula-
tion. In the early 1840s,especiallyafterhe became acquaintedwiththe
probabilisticerrorfunctionin celestialmechanics,Queteletinsistedon
the need to presentnot onlythe mean of a scale of givencharacteristics
butalso theupperand lowerlimitsbetweenwhichindividualsoscillated.
Minor or "natural"variationaround the mean was then identifiedby
Queteletas deviationthatshouldattractno unusualattention;extraordi-
naryvariation(e.g., the heightof giantsand dwarfs)he saw as "preter-
natural. . . monstrous"(1842, p. x). In addition,Queteletperceivedthat
variationaround the mean occurrednot randomlybut in a determinate
orderthatapproximatedtheprincipleofthenormaldistribution in celes-
tial mechanics(1846, p. 114; 1848b,p. ix). This principle,he now sur-
mised,was also applicableto thedistribution ofall thenonphysicalqual-
itiesof man.
Quetelet'sapplicationof the principleof normaldistribution to crime
presageda fundamentalredirection ofhis criminology and led directlyto
his positinga rigidbinaryoppositionbetweenthe statisticalmean and
"unusual" deviation.Althoughhe inferredfromthe normaldistribution
that"everyman, therefore, has a certainpropensity to break the laws"
(Quetelet 1848b, p. 94), it was also evidentto him that the criminal
propensities oftheaverageman wererarely,ifever,translatedintocrimi-
nal actions.Accordingly, thedispositionsofindividualswithpropensities
at the mean were now imbued by Queteletwith the rhetoricof their
conformity to law, medicaland psychologicalhealth,and moraltemper-
ance. Quetelet'sinterpretation of virtuein
of the Aristoteliandifferentia
theNicomacheanEthics and ofVictorCousin's(1829)juste milieuin his
Coursde l'histoirede la philosophiepersuadedhimthattheaverageman
was one who regularlychose the mean coursebetweenthe extremesof
deficiencyand excess. The virtuesof the average man thus comprised
"rationaland temperatehabits,moreregulatedpassions,[and] foresight,
as manifested byinvestment in savingsbanks,assurancesocietiesand the
different institutions whichencourageforesight" (Quetelet1842, p. 78).
With the noncriminality of the average man, Queteletfrequently jux-
taposed the criminality of vagabonds,vagrants,primitives,gypsies,the
"inferior classes," certainraces with"inferior moralstock,"and "persons
1159

of low moral character."With the virtuesof the average man, he jux-

taposed the vices of those deviantswho engaged in crime.This latter
juxtapositionrepeatedlyinformshis workof the 1840sand is found,for
example, in his contrastbetween"an industriousand prudentpeople
[and] a depravedand indolentone" (Quetelet1842, p. 41). The vices of
thosewho deviatedfromtheaverageincluded"thepassionsforgambling
of coffeehouses and low haunts . . .
. . . failures. . . the frequenting
drunkenness"(p. 78). In commonwith a widespreademphasison the
biologicalbasis ofdemographicand socialfacts(Chevalier1973,pp. 437-
41), Queteletyieldedto thenotionthatunhealthymoralitywas manifest
in biologicaldefectsand thatthosewithsuch defectshad highcriminal
propensities(1842, pp. vi-vii). Crime,he concluded,was "a pestilential
germ . . . contagious . . . [sometimes]hereditary"(Quetelet 1848b,
pp. 214-15).21
The practicaloutcomeof Quetelet'scriminology was theapplicationof
his binaryoppositionof normalityand devianceto the domainof penal-
ity.Withan insistencethatbecame moreurgentwiththeapproachofthe
1848revolution,Queteletdemandedthatgovernments identifythecauses
of crime in order to reduce the frequencyof crimeor, if possible, to
eliminatecrimealtogether."Since thenumber[ofcrimes]cannotdiminish
withoutthecauses whichinducethemundergoingpreviousmodification,
it is the provinceof legislatorsto ascertainthesecauses, and to remove
themas faras possible"(Quetelet1842, p. 108). Because it appeared on
the basis of this theorythat the same amount of crimewas regularly
producedbythesame causes, Queteletwas optimistic thatseculardistur-
be
bancessuch as crimecould reduced simplyby reducing of
theintensity
theircauses. While legislatorscould not hope to preventall crime,there
was, nevertheless,"an ensembleof laws, an enlightenedadministration
and a social statesuchthatthenumberofcrimescan be reducedas much
as possible"(Quetelet1846, pp. 357-58).
Accordingto Quetelet,because everygovernment, like everyphysical
body,is confronted by two typesof force("thosethatare attractiveand
21 Thisconclusion shouldbe comparedwithQuetelet'sseemingly innocuousstatement,

voicedmuchearlier,that"mancarriesat birththegermsof all thequalitieswhich
developsuccessively andin greaterproportions" of
([183la] 1984,p. 14).The influence
Gall'sand Spurzheim's phrenology on Quetelethereis unmistakable. Gall had beena
residentof Paris since 1807,and it is fairlysafeto assumethat,perhapsthrougha
commonnetwork offriends,he and Queteleteitherkneweach otheror movedin the
sameintellectualcircles.It mustalso be mentioned thatComtehimself was oneofthe
earliestmembers oftheSociWt6 phrenologique andthatitwas inGall'sphrenology that
he hopedto finda mediatingprincipleforhis sociologyand biology(see also n. 16
above).A biologicalreadingofQueteletis supported byDurkheim's (1897,pp. 301-2)
discussionin Suicide oftheconceptof theaverageman.
1160

Quetelet
thosethat are repulsive"),wise statecraftconsistsin the pursuitof two

policiestowardcrime.First,thestateshouldinitiatean appropriatereac-
tion to combat and paralyzethe recalcitrantminoritywith incorrigible
criminaltendencies,and, Queteletsuggests,thisreactionshouldinvolve
adherenceto the principlesof the criminalcode, the constantdetection
and prosecutionof criminals,a uniformity in the decisionsofjuries and
judges, and themaintenanceofan appropriaterelationbetweenthegrav-
ityofan offenseand thepunishmentawarded it (1846, pp. 356-57).22 In
addition,ameliorativereforms shouldbe introducedso that"theelements
of disorganization. . . thosewho provokerevolutions"(Quetelet1848b,
p. 295) would be preventedfromdestroying the verybasis of the social
system.Second, the stateshouldparticipatein the inevitableprogressof
civilizationby allowingthemoraland intellectualqualitiesoftheaverage
man to flourish;to thisend, a government shouldenactand enforcelaws
to reducethe effectof seculardisturbancesand to encouragean equilib-
rium in the social system."The more do deviationsfromthe average
disappear... themore,consequently, do we tendto approachthatwhich
is beautiful,thatwhichis good" (Quetelet1842, p. 108).
QUETELET AND HIS CRITICS

Accordingto the discursivestandardsof his era, Quetelethad demon-
stratedhis mechanisticnotionsof theconstancyof crime,its causes, and
its regulation,as well as it was thenpossibleto do. His insistencethat
crimewas an inevitablefeatureof social organizationand, moreover,
almost a necessaryconsequence of it assured his work a widespread
notoriety. As Sarton(1935, p. 4) has observed,no one could have carried
scientificindiscretionfurtherthan by attempting,as did Quetelet,to
analyze social transgressions as if theywere physicalaccidentsand to
considerpassionsofthesoul as iftheywereabnormalities oftheweather.
Given public opinion,which identified the criminality
of the dangerous
classes with working-classfailuresand rebellion,Quetelet'sidea that
22 Throughout hiscriminology itis unclearwhether Quetelet'sratherscantyadviceon

penalitywas based on the repressivestrategies of the ancienregimeor on the re-
habilitativemodel of the prisonfavoredin the postrevolutionary era. Despite
Quetelet'sprofessedallegiancetofreewill,a consistent beliefinrehabilitationseemsto
have beenprecludedby his subscription to thedeterministic views(ofVillermeand
others)thatprisonlifenecessarily exacerbatedcriminalpropensities (e.g., Quetelet
[183la] 1984,p. 17n. 6) and thatcriminalityitselfwas hereditary.Morethana decade
afterQuetelet'sdeath,Frenchcriminologists and anthropologists tendedto adoptthe
neo-Lamarckian "degeneracy" modelofcriminality ratherthantheLombrosian "born
criminal" typebecause,as Nye(1984,pp. 101-2, 119-21) has suggested, thisposition
allowedbeliefin voluntarism and rehabilitation.
1161

criminalpropensitieswere distributed throughout thepopulationwas an

affrontto the moral sensibilitiesof the law-abiding citizenry.To a
judiciarythatcouchedlegal responsibility and theapplicationof punish-
mentin the classical discourseabout the freelegal subject, Quetelet's
ideas aboutthecausalityofcrimeamountedto a deterministic heresy,for,
ifcrimeshad social ratherthanindividualcauses, thenperhapscriminals
could not be held strictlyaccountablefortheirmisdeeds.
However,in Quetelet'sown lifetime, therecognitionofhiscriminology
as such was largelypreemptedby controversy about the natureof his
generalcontribution to statisticalanalysis.23One facetofthecontroversy
focusedon the positionthatQueteletwas believedto have takentoward
freewill. In thisdebate, therewas no middlegroundbetweenthedeter-
ministsand the spiritualists,betweenthose who adhered to Quetelet's
perceivedsocial determinism and thosewho preferred to discerna faint
promiseofsocial equilibriumthroughindividualmoralimprovement. To
thespiritualists,determinism in anyformrepresented an ungodlyopposi-
tion to the soul, to Christianity, and to freewill. To the determinists,
spiritualismwas a metaphysicaldoctrinewith roots in the untenable
philosophiesof Germanromanticismand naturalism.These competing
positionsresultedin a ratherfruitless debate thatcontinueduntiltheend
of the century(Lottin[1912] 1969, pp. 413-58).24
Quetelethimselfwas clearlyperplexedbytheaccusationthathis moral
23 In France,Quetelet's criminology contributedto thegrowthoftheempiricaltradi-

tionrepresented bysuchimportant studiesas Fregier'sDangerousClassesand Parent-
Duchatelet'sProstitution in Paris. The receptionof his workoutsideBelgiumand
France was generallyveryfavorable,especiallyin England.JohnHerschel,e.g.,
reviewedthe broad span of Quetelet'sendeavorsand arguedstrongly that,while
Quetelet'ssocialmechanicswas evidencethatstatistical progressinthesocialsciences
was lessadvancedthaninthenaturalsciences,nevertheless, no onehad better exerted
himselfin the scientific collectionand analysisof political,social,and moraldata;
Quetelet'sadvice on how to represstheviolentand rapacious,Herschelcontinued,
"deservesto be written in lettersofgold"(1850,p. 37). Indeed,Quetelet'swritings on
crimecontinued toexertgreatinfluence on workas diverseincontent andas separated
in timeas HenryBuckle'sHistoryof Civilisationin England(1860) and Charles
Goring'scelebratedTheEnglishConvict(1913).
24 It couldnothaveescapedtheattention ofthespiritualists
thattheimplicitdetermin-
ismofSur l'hommehad a certainappeal in the1840sto radicalwriters suchas Marx
and Engels(whosaw in thisbooka demonstration ofthefundamental linksbetween
modernbourgeois society,immiserization, and theamountandsortsofcrime).Besides
theworkofQueteletand ofthosesuchas Marxand Engels,itwas onlyintheworkers'
newspapers,such as L'Humanitaire,La Fraternite', and Almanachpopulairede la
France,thatindividualist descriptionsofcriminalitywerechallenged byan alternative
analysisthatsoughttheoriginsofcrimein theinegalitarian structureofsocietyitself.
Thus,L'HumanitaireofAugust1841decreed:"The manwhokillsyouis notfreenot
to killyou.It is society,orto be moreprecise,bad socialorganization thatis responsi-
ble" (quotedin Foucault1979,p. 287).
1162

Quetelet
statisticsassumed human action to be totallydevoid of choice and free

will. Toward the end of Research on the Propensity for Crime,forex-
ample,he held out thefollowingpromise:"I am farfromconcluding...
thatman can do nothingforhis amelioration.... He possessesa moral
strengthcapable of modifyingthe laws which concernhim" (Quetelet
[1831a] 1984, p. 69; see also Constant1961; Dupreel 1942, p. 31). The
1842 English translationof Sur l'hommecontaineda new prefacein
whichQuetelettriedto defendhimselfagainstvarious chargesof fatal-
ism,atheism,and materialism.Moreover,at thebeginningof thistrans-
lation,he instructedthe publisherto inserta noticeto the effectthathe
was "no theoristor systemmaker"and thathe simplywished"to arriveat
truthby the onlylegitimateway, namely,theexaminationoffacts-the
incontrovertible facts furnishedby statisticaldata" (Quetelet 1842,
p. iv).25So sensitivewas Queteletto the chargethatdeterminism neces-
sarilyembracedatheismthathe frequently affirmed his beliefin "thewise
influenceof divine power." In this way and in others,Queteletconsis-
tentlyeschewedany explicitinterpretation thatothers,fora wide variety
of reasons,wishedto foiston his facts.
In additionto the controversy surrounding Quetelet'spositionon free
will, a second controversy stemmedfromQuetelet'sidea of the average
man. To sometheorists,thisidea-which Quetelet(1848, p. vii) implied
was his pivotal concept-was a sourceof acrimoniousdebate, scandal,
and grief.AgainstQuetelet'sbeliefthatthe statisticalmeans of various
physicaltraitscould somehowbe combinedto forman "average,"para-
digmatichumanbeing,contemporary statisticians
made threemajor ob-
jections. The firstof these was made in 1843 by the rectorof the
Academiede Grenoble,thephilosopherand mathematicaleconomistAn-
toineCournot.Cournotarguedthat,just as a righttrianglecannotgener-
ally be formedfromthe average lengthsof the threesides of manyright
triangles,so too the average man determinedfromthe average physical
measurements (of height,of feet,of strength,etc.) of manymen would
simplybe "un hommeimpossible"(1843,p. 210). Queteletdid notreplyto
thisdifficulty.26The attack againstthe average man was continuedby
25The net cast by antideterministviews includedothersbesidesQuetelet.For ex-

ample,in a paper read to the StatisticalSectionof theBritishAssociationin 1839,
RawsonW. Rawson,a follower ofQuetelet,complained that"undeserved ridiculehas
beencastuponsomeattempts whichhave beenmadeto showthatmoralphenomena
are subject to established and general laws . . . " (1839, p. 344).
26 It seemsQueteletneverresponded to specificcriticisms
of his work.Onlyat one
pointdidhe (1848a,pp. 13-20)deignto recognize, and thenunsuccessfully todismiss,
threechargesdirectedagainstthebroadenterprise (1) thecausesof
ofmoralstatistics:
socialfactscan neverproperly be observedbecausetheyare too numerousand too
variableintheirinfluence;
(2) moralfacts,unlikeotherstatistical
facts,arenotcompa-
1163

Jacques Bertillon,professorofdemographyat theEcole d'anthropologie,

who was a pioneerof statisticalanalysisof the ratesof divorce,alcohol-
ism, and suicide and who provided some of Durkheim'stheoretical
groundwork.Bertillonsuggestedthatan averageman, constructed from
each of thehumanattributes, was nota scientific
entitybut an invention
of the imagination.Far from being an ideal of human perfection,
Quetelet'saverageman was theepitomeofmediocrity; he could onlybe a
monster,the"typede la vulgarite"(Bertillon1876,p. 311). A thirdobjec-
tionwas made byJosephBertrand,who arguedthatQuetelethad defined
"man" independently of particularmen consideredat random.He rea-
soned that,because the average man mustnecessarilybe average in all
his attributes,his featuresmust thereforesimultaneouslyembodythe
averages of such antithesesas beauty and ugliness.The average man
could thereforebe neitherugly nor beautiful,neitherfoolishnor wise,
neithervirtuousnorcriminal,neitherstrongnorweak, neitherbravenor
cowardly.Bertrandsuggested,perhapsfacetiously,that,in the bodyof
the average man, Queteletwould perhapsplace an average soul (1889,
p. xliii).
To these threeobjectionsto Quetelet'sidea of the average man, a
fourthshouldbe added, namely,theobjectionmade by Emile Durkheim
in Suicide (1897). Having congratulatedQueteletforpointingto theexis-
tenceof regularitiesin social phenomena,Durkheimwenton to argue,
however,that these cannotbe explainedby the conceptof the average
man. The descriptionof social regularities,even if accurate and por-
trayedin greatdetail, does not explain them.In the particularcase of
suiciderates,Durkheimreasoned,thiswas so fortwo reasons.First,the
factthat 15 out of 100,000 personskill themselveseach year "does not
implythat the othersare exposed in any degree" (p. 304). Durkheim
therefore remindsus thatQuetelet'saverageman was constructed as the
arithmetic mean of qualitiesthatoccurin varyingdegreesin all individ-
uals of a giventype.But, as withthevast majorityof any givenpopula-
tionthat,in practice,has no propensityto suicidewhatsoever,so also, in
Quetelet'sterms,could it be said that the average man does not kill
himself.From this point on, Quetelet'sidea of the average man, as a
properobject of scientificinquiry,was not to be takenseriously.27
rable,and one therefore

cannotdeducean averagefromtheiraggregate; and (3) the
studyof moralfactsmustalwaysbe incomplete becauseone can neverknowevery-
thingabouttheactions-goodorbad-of man.Quetelet'sresponse tothesedifficulties
was that,byrecognizing theirpartialtruth,he thereby
deliveredhisownworkfrom
thecriticismimpliedby thesecharges.
27 Attemptshaveoccasionallybeenmadetoresurrect Quetelet'sconceptoftheaverage
man,mostrecently bytheFrenchmathematician MauriceFrechet.Frechethas sug-
gestedthat Quetelet'shommemoyencan be rescuedby the morepreciseconcept
1164

Quetelet
CONCLUSIONS
It has been suggestedin thispaper thatQuetelet'scriminology included
some of the focal concernsin penalityand the statisticalmovement.
During the Restoration,these domains coincidedin a commonissue,
namely,theregulationofthedangerousclasses. Quetelet'ssocial mechan-
ics of crimeemergedalmostdirectly,in otherwords,fromthe conjunc-
tionof the apparentfailureof Frenchpenal strategiesand theexpansion
in the scope of the statisticalmovementto includeempiricalsocial re-
search.This conjunctionprovidedthestructure and muchofthesubstan-
tive contentof Quetelet'scriminology.Its structurewas formedby the
relentlessapplicationof the methodsof the naturalsciencesto the moral
phenomenareportedin theofficialrecordsof crime.Its contentconsisted
in an empiricalexaminationoftheeffects ofdifferent social environments
on the individuals-drawn largelyfromthe dangerousclasses-who
passed throughthe successivelayersof the administration of justice. In
thisexamination,Queteletmade no theoreticaldistinction-nordid he
even contemplateone-between his own observationalcategoriesand
thoseofthestateofficials who constructed thedata in theComptege'ne'ral.
The objectofQuetelet'scriminology was therefore thealreadyconstituted
problemof the dangerousclasses; its outcomewas a positivistdiscourse
thatfostereda rigidbinaryoppositionbetweennormality and deviation.
in
Where,then,should Quetelet'scriminology placed the historyof
be
criminological theory?This questionhas no simpleanswer.The response
to itdepends,in part,on theidentification ofa distinctivesetofdiscursive
techniquesand objectsby whichcriminology as such can be demarcated
fromotherinfantdisciplinessuch as penology,phrenology, and psychia-
try.But, since the early historyof moderncriminology is still largely
unchartedterrain,the placementof Quetelet'scontribution in its subse-
quentmaturationmust,forthepresent,remainquitetentative.Quetelet's
analysisofcrimecontained,and maybeevenfostered, manyoftheuncer-
taintiesand the inconsistencies associatedwiththe transitionalphase in
French penalitybetween classicism and positivism,between the un-
bridledlegal subjectof the formerand the overdetermined object of the
latter.In the soul of Quetelet'scriminal,as in thatof VictorHugo's ex-
convictJeanValjean (inLes Mise'rables),theredwelleda primitivespark,
a divineelement,incorruptible in this worldand immortalin the next,
hommetypique.The latterhas twobasicqualities:"(1) thetypicalmanofa population

willbe theoneindividualofthispopulationwhoexcludesall possibility ofincompati-
bilityamongthedifferent ofthistypicalman;(2) thetypicalmanought
characteristics
tobe typicalin relationto theensemble without
ofhischaracteristics beingnecessarily
typicalrelativeto each ofthem"(Frechet1955,p. 327).
1165

that could be kindled,lit up, and made radiantby good and that evil
could neverentirelyextinguish.Quetelet'scriminology cannotbe under-
stood exclusivelyas a part of the positivistreactionto the voluntaristic
excessesof classical penologyand jurisprudence;at most,Queteletwas a
reluctantdeterminist who neitherdisownedthe classicaldoctrineof free
willnordeniedthedeterminate characterofsocial behavior.Althoughhis
presociologicaldiscourse was soon to be transcendedin fundamental
waysbyMarx and Weberand, especially,byDurkheim,it is perhapsfair
to say that Quetelet provided the positivistcore of a deterministic
criminology that subsequentlydominatedthe labors of Lombroso,Gor-
ing,and Bonger,who emphasized,respectively, biologism,mentalhered-
itarianism,and economism.Moreover,by identifying the existenceof
lawlike regularitiesin recordedcriminalbehavior, by suggestingthat
crimewas subject to causal laws of the orderfoundin the naturalsci-
ences,and by implyingthatcriminalbehaviorwas as mucha productof
societyas ofvolition,Queteletalso openedup thepossibility ofa sociolog-
ical analysisof crime.This greatachievementwas recognizedby Durk-
heim and Fauconnetwhen theytracedto Queteletthe emergenceof an
autonomous sociology resolutelyopposed to methodologicalindivid-
ualism: "Social phenomenacould no longerbe deemed the productof
fortuitous combinations,arbitraryacts of the will, or local and chance
circumstances.Their generalityatteststo theiressentialdependenceon
generalcauses which, everywherethat theyare present,producetheir
effects.... Wherefora longtimetherehas been perceivedonlyisolated
actions,lackinganylinks,therewas foundto be a systemofdefinite laws.
This was already expressedin the titleof the book in which Quetelet
expounded the basic principlesof the statisticsof morality"(1903,
pp. 201-2).
REFERENCES
Bertillon, Jacques. 1876. "La theorie des moyennes en statistique." Journal de la
societede statistiquede Paris 17:265-71,286-308.
Bertrand,Joseph. 1889. Calcul de probabilites. Paris: Gauthiers-Villers.
Buckle, Henry Thomas. 1860. History of Civilisation in England. 2 vols. London:
Parker.
Chevalier,Louis. 1973.LaboringClassesand DangerousClassesin Paris duringthe
First Half of the Nineteenth Century. Translated by Frank Jellinek. Princeton,
N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress.
Coleman, William. 1982. Death Is a Social Disease. Madison: Universityof Wisconsin
Press.
Comptegeneralde l'administration
de la justice criminelle
en France. 1827. Paris:
L'Imprimerie royale.
Comte, Auguste. (1838) 1869. Cours de philosophie positive. Vol. 4. Paris: Bailliere.
Constant, J. 1961. "A propos de l'cole Franco-Belge du milieu social au XIXieme
siecle." Pp. 303-15 in La Responsabilite penale, edited by J. Leaute. Paris: Dalloz.
1166

Quetelet
Cournot,A. 1843. Expositionde la th'oriedes chanceset des probabilites.Paris:

Hachette.
Cousin, Victor. 1829. Cours de l'histoire de la philosophie. 3 vols. Paris: Didier.
de Candolle, Alphonse. 1830. Considerations sur la statistique des delits. Paris: Bib-
liotheque universelle.
Doerner,Klaus. 1981. Madmenand theBourgeoisie:A Social HistoryofInsanityand
Psychiatry.Translated by J. Neugroschel and J. Steinberg. Oxford: Blackwell.
Donovan, James. 1981. "Justice Unblind: The Juries and the Criminal Classes in
France, 1825-1914." JournalofSocial History15(1): 89-107.
Douglas, Jack D. 1967. The Social Meanings of Suicide. Princeton,N.J.: Princeton
UniversityPress.
Duesterberg, Thomas J. 1979. "Criminology and the Social Order in Nineteenth-
CenturyFrance." Ph.D. dissertation,Indiana University.
Dupreel, Eugene, ed. 1942. AdolpheQuetelet:Pageschoisiesetcommentees. Brussels:
Officede publicite.
Durkheim, Emile. (1897) 1951. Suicide: A Studyin Sociology.Translated by J. A.
Spaulding and George Simpson. New York: Free Press.
Durkheim, Emile, and Paul Fauconnet. (1903) 1982. "Sociology and the Social Sci-
ences." Pp. 175-208 in The Rules ofSociological Method, edited and introducedby
Steven Lukes. Translated by W. D. Halls. London: Macmillan.
Elmer, M. C. 1933. "Century-OldEcological Studies in France." AmericanJournalof
Sociology39(1): 63-70.
Faure, Fernand. 1918. "The Development and Progress of Statistics in France."
Pp. 217-329 in The History ofStatistics, edited by JohnKoren. New York: Frank-
lin.
Foucault, Michel. 1979. Disciplineand Punish:TheBirthofthePrison.Translated
by Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage.
.1980. PowerlKnowledge: SelectedInterviews and OtherWritings, 1972-1977.
Edited by Colin Gordon, translatedby Gordon et al. New York: Pantheon.
Frechet, Maurice. 1955. "Rehabilitationde la notion statistiquede l'homme moyen."
Pp. 317-41 in Les mathematiques et le concret.Paris: Presses universitairesde
France.
Fregier,H. -A. 1840. Des classesdangereuses de la populationdansles grandesvilles,
et des moyensde les rendremeilleurs.2 vols. Paris:Bailliere.
Gibbons, Don C. 1979. The Criminological Enterprise. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Giddens, Anthony.1965. "The Suicide Problem in French Sociology." BritishJournal
ofSociology16:3-18.
Goring,Charles. 1913. TheEnglishConvict:A StatisticalStudy.London: His Majes-
ty's StationeryOffice.
Guerry,Andre-Michel.1829. Statistiquecomparede l'etat de l'instruction et du
nombredes crimes.Paris.
. 1833. Essai sur la statistiquemoralede la France.Paris:Crochard.
Hankins, Frank H. 1908. "Adolphe Quetelet as Statistician." Studies in History,
Economicsand PublicLaw 31(4): 443-567.
Herschel, John. 1850. "Review." Edinburgh Review92(185): 1-57.
Houchon, Guy. 1976. "Lacunes, faiblesses et emplois des statistiques criminelles."
Etudesrelativesa la recherche criminologique 14:7-29.
Jacoby,Joseph E. 1979. Classics in Criminology.Oak Park, Ill.: Moore.
Landau, David, and Paul Lazarsfeld. 1968. "Adolphe Quetelet." Pp. 247-57 in Inter-
nationalEncyclopaediaof the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillanand Free
Press.
Lindesmith,Alfred,and Yale Levin. 1937. "The Lombrosian Myth in Criminology."
American JournalofSociology42:653-71.
1167

Lodhi, Abdul Quaiyum, and Charles Tilly. 1973. "Urbanization, Crime, and Collec-
tive Violence in 19th-CenturyFrance." AmericanJournal of Sociology 79(2): 296-
318.
Lottin,Joseph. (1912) 1969. Quetelet: Statisticien et sociologue. New York: Franklin.
Mailly, Edward. 1875. "Essai sur la vie et les ouvrages de Quetelet." Annuaire de
l'academie royale des sciences, des lettreset des beaux arts Belgique 41:109-279.
Mannheim, Hermann, ed. 1972. Pioneers in Criminology.Montclair, N.J.: Smith.
Marx, Karl. (1853) 1956. "Capital Punishment."New York Daily Tribune, February
18, 1853. Reprintedin pp. 228-30 ofKarl Marx: Selected Writingsin Sociology and
Social Philosophy,edited by T. B. Bottomoreand M. Rubel. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Morris, Terence. 1957. The Criminal Area. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Nye, Robert A. 1984. Crime, Madness, and Politics in Modern France. Princeton:
PrincetonUniversityPress.
O'Brien, Patricia. 1982. The Promise of Punishment: Prisons in Nineteenth-Century
France. Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress.
Pelfrey,William V. 1980. The Evolution of Criminology.Cincinnati: Anderson.
Perrot,Jean-Claude, and StuartJ. Woolf. 1984. State and Statistics in France, 1789-
1815. London: Harwood Academic.
Perrot, Michelle. 1975. "Delinquance et systeme penitentiaireen France au XIXe
siecle." Annales: Economies, societe, civilisations 30(1): 67-91.
Petit,Jacques G. 1984. "The Birth and Reformof Prisons in France." Pp. 125-47 in
The Emergence of Carceral Institutions: Prisons, Galleys and Lunatic Asylums,
1550-1900, edited by Pieter Spierenburg.Rotterdam:Erasmus University.
Porter, Theodore M. 1985. "The Mathematics of Society: Variation and Error in
Quetelet's Statistics." British Journalfor the History of Science 18:51-69.
Quetelet, Adolphe. 1826. "Memoire sur les lois des naissances et de la mortalitea
Bruxelles." Nouveaux memoiresde l'academie royale des sciences et belles-lettres de
Bruxelles 3:495-512.
1828. Instructionspopulaires sur le calcul des probabilites. Brussels: Tarlier.
1829. "Recherches statistiques sur le royaume des Pays-Bas." Nouveaux
memoiresde l'academie royale 5:25-38.
. (183 la) 1984. Research on the PropensityforCrime at DifferentAges. Trans-
lated and introducedby Sawyer F. Sylvester.Cincinnati: Anderson.
1831b. Recherches sur la loi de la croissance de l'homme. Brussels: Hayez.
1835. Sur l'hommeet sur le developpementde ses facultes, ou Essai de phys-
ique sociale. Paris: Bachelier.
. 1842. A Treatise on Man. Translated by R. Knox and T. Smibert.Edinburgh:
Chambers.
. 1846. Lettres a S.A.R., le Duc Regnant de Saxe-Coburg et Gotha, sur la
theorie des probabilites. Brussels: Hayez.
. (1848a) 1984. "Sur la statistiquemorale et les principesqui doiventen former
la base." Deviance et societe 8(1): 13-41.
1848b. Du systemesocial et des lois qui le regissent.Paris: Guillaumin.
1869. Physique sociale; ou, Essai sur le developpementdesfacultes. Brussels:
Murquardt.
. 1871. "Des lois concernantle developpementde l'homme." Annuaire de l'ob-
servatoirede Bruxelles 38:205-16.
Radzinowicz, Leon. 1966. Ideology and Crime. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Rawson, Rawson W. 1839. "An Inquiry into the Statisticsof Crime in England and
Wales." Journal of the Statistical Society ofLondon 2:316-44.
Sarton, George. 1935. "Preface to Volume 22 of Isis (Quetelet)." Isis 23:4-24.
1168

Quetelet
Sellin, Thorsten.1937. " 'The LombrosianMythin Criminology'-Letter to the

Editor."American JournalofSociology42:897-99.
Shaw, Clifford R., and HenryD. McKay. 1942.JuvenileDelinquencyand Urban
Areas.Chicago:University ofChicagoPress.
Stead,PhilipJohn.1983. ThePolice ofFrance.London:Macmillan.
Tarde, Gabriel.1886.La criminalitecomparee.Paris:Alcan.
Taylor,Ian, Paul Walton,and JockYoung. 1973. The New Criminology. London:
Routledge& Kegan Paul.
Tilly,Charles,LouiseTilly,and RichardTilly. 1975.TheRebelliousCentury: 1830-
1930. Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press.
Tombs,Robert.1980."Crimeand theSecurity oftheState:The 'DangerousClasses'
and Insurrectionin Nineteenth-Century
Paris."Pp. 214-37 in Crimeand theLaw:
The Social Historyof Crimein WesternEurope since 1500, editedby V. A. C.
Gatrell,BruceLenman,and Geoffrey Parker.London:Europa.
Treiber,Hubert, and Heinz Steinert.1980. Die Fabrikationdes zuverldssigen
Menschen.Berlin:Ernst.
Villerm6,Rene. 1820.Des prisonstellesqu'ellessontet tellesqu'ellesdevraientetre:
Ouvragedans lequel on les considerepar rapporta l'hygiene,a la moraleet a
l'economiepolitique.Paris:Mequignon-Marvis.
Westergaard,Harold. 1932.ContributionstotheHistoryofStatistics.London:King.
Wolfgang, MarvinE. 1972."CesareLombroso."Pp. 232-91inPioneersin Criminol-
ogy,editedbyH. Mannheim.Montclair,N.J.: Smith.
Wright,Gordon.1983. Betweenthe Guillotineand Liberty:Two Centuriesof the
CrimeProblemin France.New York: OxfordUniversity Press.
Zehr,Howard.1976.Crimeand theDevelopment ofModernSociety.London:Croom
Helm.
1169


The University of Chicago Press

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The University of Chicago Press

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adolphe Quetelet and the Origins of Positivist Criminology

Author(s): Piers Beirne

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

This articleexaminesthe largelyunacknowledgedcontribution of

Societyitselfcontainsthe germsof all the crimescom-

Duringthe formativeperiodof social science,AdolpheQueteletwas for

1 This paper profited at

?) 1987 by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved.

1140 AJS Volume 92 Number5 (March 1987): 1140-69

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

a pioneerand seminalthinkeris securelybeyonddoubt. Quetelet'sanaly-

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

heim's(1972) Pioneersin Criminology, an importantbiographicalcollec-

5 The intellectualmaturationof Lombroso's idea of the born criminalhas been charted

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

outline of the historicalcontextof the genesis of Quetelet's oeuvre,

PENALITY AND THE MORAL STATISTICS OF CRIME

6 In the Napoleonic era, these strategiesoperated in concertwith a new criminalcode

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

syphilitics,alcoholics, idiots and eccentrics,vagabonds, immigrants,

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

des genshonnetesrecordedthattherewere 20,000 professional criminals

9 In turn, this assumption led to extreme harshness on the part of juries-whose

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

(Wright1983, pp. 48-50; Duesterberg1979, pp. 29-31); between1813

10 These increases in recorded criminalitycan be explained in part by the turbulent

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

centurythatthesurveillanceand exposureofcriminalscouldbe servedby

12 Priorto the Restoration,

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

Ministryof Justice),immediatelyaftera winterin which the rates of

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

QUETELET AND THE SOCIAL MECHANICS OF CRIME

Social Mechanicsand the AverageMan

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

duringhis monthsin Paris on this missionthat Queteletwas firstin-

intensified bytheBelgiannationalist movement, butthereis no compelling evidence

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

based on calculation"(Quetelet 1828, p. 230). This ambitiousproject

The Constancyof Crime

17 Accordingto Durkheim(1897, p. 300 n. 1), the founderof moralstatistics was

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

items.Vital phenomenawere morecomplexnot onlyin theirindividual

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

scientificanalysis of crime must assume "a relationshipprettynearly

CriminalPropensitiesand the Causes of Crime

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

?0 oo, o C' oexe

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

employment or in lowlyoccupationshad a greaterpropensity (penchant)

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

AGE AND THE PROPENSITY FOR CRIME, 1826-1829

Under 16 ......... 80 440 85 3,304 161

SOURCE.-Quetelet ([183la] 1984, p. 56).

and dividedthenumberofcrimesby thepopulationin therespectiveage

This content downloaded from 142.51.1.212 on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:25:03 PM

SEX AND THE PROPENSITY FOR CRIME, 1826-1829

CRIMES AGAINST CRIMES AGAINST

YEAR Men Women Relationship Men Women Relationship

1826 ......... 1,639 268 .16 4,073 1,008 .25

SOURCE.-Quetelet ([1831a] 1984, p. 47).

suggeststhatone could therefore supposethatmale criminalpropensities

20Women'slack of visibility of thelenientattitude