Throughout decades, it can be argued that the concept of crime is a subjective area to debate upon, which is continually under change. The Oxford dictionary defines crime as ‘an act or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law’. Nevertheless, it can be argued that this definition is a mere outline of what is constituted as a crime. Social and cultural factors largely determine what an individual and society as a whole, determine to be criminal. Crime in one society can be seen as completely normal in another. For instance, drinking alcohol in a westernised society is normal whereas in an Islamic society it is prohibited. What may have been seen as a crime many years ago, may be seen as an act of normality in present. Keeping this in mind, history can be known as a major factor which leads into understanding the reason behind shifting attitudes and perceptions towards the law, criminal behaviour, the rise in statistics or even the commonness of the ‘dark figure of crime’. Why have attitudes changed over the years? What constitutes as criminal behaviour and has history played a major role?
As suggested by Dr James Sharpe, the survival of sources remains an issue when dating further back (History of Crime in England 1514-1914 p.1). The judiciary system during the Elizabethan era was one which was subject to high property offences such as theft and burglary where prosecutions were highly reliant upon public executions and hangings. The Elizabethan era was known to be split into two segregated sections – the upper class and the working class thus, there were major divisions between social equality and stability. However, the demand during the 1850s for a modernised policing system and the creation of an urbanised, industrial society meant that community action was seen as a less preferred method for punishment and a claim for punishment through the judiciary system had increased. Due to the destabilisation of societal norms and values and a need for more formative customs of punishment, a call upon a better policed society was made. A renowned psychologist, who wrote in the late 1800s from a functionalist perspective – Emile Durkheim stated within his research that crime is functional for society and an integral part to maintain a healthy society which bonds each other together. The maintenance of collective conscience and primary socialisation play a key role in affirming to the social norms within society. However, when these begin to weaken society begins to dysfunction and crime rates increasingly soar (http://www.sociology.org.uk/pcfcri95.pdf). His research emphasised on the idea of community values and the family playing a key role in socialisation to prevent criminal activities from rising. However, since the defeat of the French in 1815 new problems began to arise which threatened the social stability of the 1800s through the emergence of an industrialising society (History of Crime England J.Sharpe).
Moving further on, the role of history has contributed largely in the way crimes are now counted and the way punishment is enforced within the contemporary UK. During the 1700 to late 1800s, recording of crime was largely focussed on the victim dealing with their culprit at their own stake. Community action was more of a preference for victims rather than prosecutions being taken to court and penalised for their actions. The victim, in majority of these cases, was known to hold a say in whether they would like their culprit to be punished or financial proceedings to be given in return. Unlike present day contemporary Britain, the late 1700s focussed on the recording and enforcement of crime and punishment through a system of paid watchmen or local policing. The ‘bow street runners’ was a local policing scheme enforced by the magistrates which hired out thief takers on a retainer. This meant that when a crime was reported, the bow street runner would be sent out by the magistrates to detect and apprehend the culprit. The aim of this was to deter criminals in making them aware that they would be caught if they committed an offence (https://www.bl.uk/georgian-britain/articles/crime-and-punishment-in-georgian-britain).
The aim of this recording process was to prohibit and warn others towards future criminal acts which statistically, through records, has proven to be true. The period of 1700s and 1800s still saw minimal crime to what records show today. The recorded crime statistics for England and Wales show that during the late 1800s the number of crimes recorded were far lower than those recorded in the early 2000s. For instance, in 1826 the approximate number of total recorded crimes were 82,426 in comparison to 5,525,024 in 2001/2 (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/historical-crime-data). These statistics, provided by the government therefore provide an image that over the years, as society has become more industrialised, crime rates have also begun to soar. However, what must be taken into consideration is that during the late 1800s the recording of crime was not always known to be a reliable source of information. On some occasions the victim may be unable to recognise the culprit whereas on others, it simply may be the extent to which the police may think the crime is serious to record it. The number of crimes recorded are largely affected by what is reported to the police and as showed within these statistics, levels of reporting have fairly increased over the years from individuals dealing with their culprits themselves to placing faith into the judiciary system and letting the police and courts in deciding the punishment.
This leads us onto the topic of the ‘dark figure of crime’ which is often referred to the idea of unreported and undiscovered crime. Sociologists along with criminologist play a key role in researching why and how a certain number of crimes are failed to appear in the official statistics and why they remain to be unnoticed when enforcing laws. Albert Biderman, who specialised in social science research defined the dark figure of crime as – ‘occurrences that by some criteria are called crime yet that are not registered in the statistics of whatever agency was the source of the data being used’ (On exploring the dark figure of crime, Albert Biderman P.1). When referring back to the Elizabethan and Georgian era of Britain, the reporting and recording of a crime was largely held towards a police officer’s responsibility which therefore meant that what they perceived as serious, would be recorded and took note of. However, since an increase in the modernisation of recording crimes and the issue of the ‘dark figure’ – surveys such as the ‘Crime Survey of England and Wales’ have become a source which seek and understand crime rates which fail to appear in statistics in order to develop crime reduction policies along with understanding the patterns towards offending rates (http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/HomeReadMore.html). The survey aims to ask individuals about their experience with crime in the previous 12 months which allow them to understand, which types of crimes have been reported or underreported in comparison to those which are publicised within the OCS (Official crime statistics). The Crime Survey of England and Wales therefore allows for a wider insight into identifying who is at most risk of being affected by crimes, the experiences individuals have faced and how it has affected their lifestyle routines but also, the attitudes given by the judicial system and society in its own towards certain areas of crime. This however, was not a possibility throughout the Elizabethan or Georgian era as developments within statistical data were not at their peak phase in order to conclude what and which crime truly affects an individual’s quality of life. Not only this, but the survey allows for an understanding when developing prevention schemes which may not have always been the case through the simple identification of crimes within the OCS.
To conclude, it can be said that history plays a large role in contributing to the study of crime as a whole. Not only through demonstrating the changes in the way crime is defined and viewed through society’s perspective but also, portraying the work not only by the police, but surveys, the judiciary and the legal system itself. These studies along with the research done, contribute towards reaching an understanding as to why crimes are committed and why levels have begun to increase in certain areas. Whether this may be according to the extent of opportunity an individual holds or the environment an individual is surrounded in where external factors such as our primary socialisation enforces us to act in a deviant manner, leading to the performance of criminal behaviour. Although issues arise when referring to the concept of sources and whether they are a valid source of reliability, history itself plays a major role in identifying patterns and trends throughout the years. It further allows analysts to understand why certain acts of crime are committed but also to develop and create crime prevention strategies to be put forward in order to deter further criminal acts to be taken place.