No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Devil and Modernity in Late Nineteenth-Century Buenos Aires*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
Extract
In the late nineteenth century, the move away from classical criminology toward positivist criminology brought with it new categories of crime and new definitions of the criminal. A great deal of scholarship has focused on positivism's new approach, which grew out of research in Europe, especially in France and Italy, and later took hold in Argentina and other Latin American countries. It might be supposed that as a state's judicial and penal authorities and doctors of forensic medicine were becoming more professionalized and positivist at this time, and as state and society were becoming more secularized and urbanized, such a traditional figure as the devil would have disappeared from criminal court cases.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 2002
Footnotes
*
Archival Notes: AGN, TC = Archivo General de la Nación (Buenos Aires, Argentina), Tribunal Criminal.
References
1 Russell, Jeffrey Burton, Mephistopheles: The Devil in the Modern World (Ithaca and London: Cornell UP, 1986), p. 213.Google Scholar For the most part, Russell argues, the nineteenth century used the devil to satirize modern man and the human condition (p. 202).
2 Leps, Marie-Christine, Apprehending the Criminal: The Production of Deviance in Nineteenth-Century Discourse (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1992), pp. 35–36.Google Scholar
3 Horn, David G., “This Norm Which is Not One: Reading the Female Body in Lombroso's Anthropology” in Deviant Bodies: Critical Perspectives on Difference in Science and Popular Culture, eds., Terry, Jennifer and Urla, Jacqueline (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995): 109–28; pp. 112 and 116.Google Scholar This was the first book of Lombroso ’s to be translated into English and interestingly all references to sexuality, fertility, and menstruation were edited out and the sections on the “normal” woman were omitted. Asunción Lavrin's work explains well the other and contradictory view of women as repositories of moral superiority in comparison to men. Lavrin, Asunción, Women, Feminism, and Social Change in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay, 1890–1940 (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1995), pp. 48–49.Google Scholar
4 Peset, Jose Luis and Peset, Maiano, Lombroso y la escuela positivista italiana (Madrid: Ediciones Castilla, 1975), pp. 640–641;Google Scholar Lombroso, Cesare and Ferrero, Guglielmo, The Female Offender (New York and London: D. Appleton, 1903;Google Scholar original La donna delinquente: la prostituta e la donna normale [Turin: Roux, 1893]), pp. 148, 151–52.
5 AGN,2,C,64,1891 and AGN,2,C,68,1891, case against Juan Lucio Cascallares Paz and Susana Breuil de Conderc for abortion.
6 Russell, , Mephistopheles, p. 208.Google Scholar
7 Ramos Mejía, José María, “La fauna de la miseria,” Archivos de Psiquiatría, Criminología y Ciencias Afines 3 (1904): 385–405; p. 389.Google Scholar
8 Drago, Luis María, El poder marital (thesis, Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales; [Buenos Aires: El Diario, 1882] 47, pp. 12–17).Google Scholar
9 AGN, TC, 1, U, 2, 1882, case against Graciana Urrutigaray brought by her husband, Juan Bautista Bonnement, for “calumnia” and “injurias graves.” Russell discusses the French revolutionaries’ vision of the devil as a hero because he had rebelled, just like they had and much like Graciana had done, against unjust and repressive authority Russell, , Mephistopheles, pp. 174–75).Google Scholar
10 Peset, , Lombroso, pp. 632, 643, 650.Google Scholar
11 Russell, Jeffrey Burton, Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1984), p. 249;Google Scholar Russell, , The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1977), pp. 68, 73.Google Scholar It is interesting in this regard that in Fernando Cervantes’ investigation of the seventeenth century, people who sought the devil's help in sexual matters were not necessarily rewarded; and that in the eighteenth century, the Inquisition became indifferent to sexual tales of the devil; Cervantes, Fernando, The Devil in the New World: The Impact of Diabolism in New Spain (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1994), p. 87, 126.Google Scholar
12 Peset, , Lombroso, pp. 638, 641.Google Scholar
13 AGN,TC,1,A,6,1886, case brought by Gerardo Arciello and María Esperanza against José Apicelli for serious injury. Gayol, Sandra has discussed this case in Sociabilidad en Buenos Aires. Hombres, honor y cafés 1862–1910 (Buenos Aires: Signo, 2000), pp. 191–97.Google Scholar
14 Russell, , Mephistopheles, p. 206.Google Scholar
15 Lombroso, and Ferrero, , Female Offender, pp. 219–25.Google Scholar
16 Rousseau, G.S., ‘“A Strange Pathology’: Hysteria in the Early Modern World, 1500–1800” in Hysteria Beyond Freudq, eds Google Scholar., Gilman et alia, Sander L. (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1993), p. 117.Google Scholar
17 AGN,TC,2,C,21,1881, case concerning María Carnevale's attempted suicide.
18 AGN,TC,2,C,24,1882, case concerning Carmela Curcho's attempted suicide.
19 AGN,TC,2,D,53,1898, case against María Cristina D'Ambrosio for the homicide of Antonio Bobe.
20 Ingenieros, José, Obras completas, vol. 2, Histeria y sugestión (Buenos Aires: Mar Oceano, 1962), p. 15.Google Scholar
21 Argentine Penal Code, 1886, Book I, Section II, Title 3, Article 81, Incisos 1,5,12; and Article 83, Inciso 6.
22 AGN,TC,2,B,48,1891, case against the wife María Blanc Marc, and her lover Silvio Mattei, for adultery, brought by her husband Clemente Venancy. Actually, the letter being quoted here is from a second lover of María's, Marsilio Tornasi.
23 Salessi, Jorge, Médicos, maleantes y maricas (Rosario: Beatriz Viterbo, 1995), p. 57.Google Scholar
24 Trigo, Benigno, “Crossing the Boundaries of Madness: Criminology and Figurative Language in Argentina (1878–1920),” Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies 6:1 (1997): 7–20; p. 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar