The Positive School of Criminology | Page 2

science of positive criminology arose in the last quarter of the 19th
century, as a result of this strange contrast, which would be
inexplicable, if we could not discover historical and scientific reasons
for its existence. And it is indeed a strange contrast that Italy should
have arrived at a perfect theoretical development of a classical school
of criminology, while there persists, on the other hand, the disgraceful
condition that criminality assumes dimensions never before observed in
this country, so that the science of criminology cannot stem the tide of
crime in high and low circles. It is for this reason, that the positive
school of criminology arises out of the very nature of things, the same
as every other line of science. It is based on the conditions of our daily
life. It would indeed be conceited on our part to claim that we, who are
the originators of this new science and its new conclusions, deserve
alone the credit for its existence. The brain of the scientist is rather a
sort of electrical accumulator, which feels and assimilates the
vibrations and heart-beats of life, its splendor and its shame, and
derives therefrom the conviction that it must of necessity provide for
definite social wants. And on the other hand, it would be an evidence of
intellectual short-sightedness on the part of the positivist man of
science, if he did not recognize the historical accomplishments, which
his predecessors on the field of science have left behind as indelible
traces of their struggle against the unknown in that brilliant and
irksome domain. For this reason, the adherents of the positive school of
criminology feel the most sincere reverence for the classic school of
criminology. And I am glad today, in accepting the invitation of the
students of Naples, to say, that this is another reason why their
invitation was welcome to me. It is now 16 years since I gave in this
same hall a lecture on positive criminology, which was then in its
initial stages. It was in 1885, when I had the opportunity to outline the
first principles of the positive school of criminology, at the invitation of
other students, who preceded you on the periodic waves of the
intellectual generations. And the renewal of this opportunity gave me
so much moral satisfaction that, I could not under any circumstances
decline your invitation. Then too, the Neapolitan Atheneum has
maintained the reputation of the Italian mind in the 19th century, also

in that science which even foreign scientists admit to be our specialty,
namely the science of criminology. In fact, aside from the two terrible
books of the Digest, and from the practical criminologists of the Middle
Ages who continued the study of criminality, the modern world opened
a glorious page in the progress of criminal science with the modest
little book of Cesare Beccaria. This progress leads from Cesare
Beccaria, by way of Francesco Carrara, to Enrico Pessina.
Enrico Pessina alone remains of the two giants who concluded the
cycle of classic school of criminology. In a lucid moment of his
scientific consciousness, which soon reverted to the old abstract and
metaphysical theories, he announced in an introductory statement in
1879, that criminal justice would have to rejuvenate itself in the pure
bath of the natural sciences and substitute in place of abstraction the
living and concrete study of facts. Naturally every scientist has his
function and historical significance; and we cannot expect that a brain
which has arrived at the end of its career should turn towards a new
direction. At any rate, it is a significant fact that this most renowned
representative of the classic school of criminology should have pointed
out this need of his special science in this same university of Naples,
one year after the inauguration of the positive school of criminology,
that he should have looked forward to a time when the study of natural
and positive facts would set to rights the old juridical abstractions. And
there is still another precedent in the history of this university, which
makes scientific propaganda at this place very agreeable for a positivist.
It is that six years before that introductory statement by Pessina,
Giovanni Bovio gave lectures at this university, which he published
later on under the title of "A Critical Study of Criminal Law." Giovanni
Bovio performed in this monograph the function of a critic, but the
historical time of his thought, prevented him from taking part in the
construction of a new science. However, he prepared the ground for
new ideas, by pointing out all the rifts and weaknesses of the old
building. Bovio maintained that which Gioberti, Ellero, Conforti, Tissol
had already maintained, namely that it is impossible to solve the
problem which is still the theoretical foundation of the classic