Chapter 14: History, Crime Studies and the Use of History for Impact-based Research

Although the words of Voltaire encapsulate a belief held by many, including academics and researchers, that the study of history and crime is intricately connected, there is less agreement about how these two concepts are related. Some commentators, such as George Santayana, argue that an understanding of history is essential for ensuring that all our current and future actions, are informed by an understanding of the actions of those in the past.¹ In contrast, others such as Edward Gibbon suggest that crime should hold the more predominant place in this equation due to the numerous examples of crimes that have significantly affected the history of people and nations (i.e. ‘History is indeed little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of mankind’).² And yet others, including Martin Luther King Jr., espoused a belief that our actions (including our criminal acts) are a result of our history (i.e. ‘We are not makers of history. We are made by history’). This diversity of opinion regarding how crime and history intersect is prominent in the disciplines of history, and those that comprise the more traditional ‘crime studies’ – forensic psychology, criminology and legal studies. Depending on one's orientation, research articles and commentary present varying takes on how crime and history should be examined.