Banditry played recognisable and widely accepted roles societies up to the 19th-century throughout the world

Far from being a phenomenon connected only to exceptional moments of economic distress or unrest, banditry was deeply embedded in the functioning of pre-modern agrarian societies, in which it played recognisable and even accepted roles.

New research in The Historical Journal, argues that the ubiquitous presence of banditry in the 19th century was propelled by deep-running changes to local relations of class, economy and power that resulted from rapidly changing global dynamics – and that it was the advent of not only capitalism, but of the new idea of sovereignty and territoriality that destabilised banditry’s social position.

The research’s author, Francesca Fuoli of the University of Bern, said: “A lot of research has shown that banditry was in fact a key part of pre-modern societies.

“In agrarian societies, there were typically components of those societies devoted to banditry. People living in those societies weren’t always happy with the robberies and plunder that went with it, but they acknowledged these groups as a part of their societies nonetheless: such groups at times also offered a way for people to work up the political ladder to gain power locally, and to further personal status and wealth.

“This means that banditry was quite a recognised function within society, and was even accepted in some ways, because the state engaged with these figures. They weren’t just labelled as criminals; they forced the state to interact with and respond to them in a way that could not be ignored. This means that they had to be incorporated into society. Unlike bandits and criminal groups today, they were not at society’s margins.”

Italian archives illuminate how topography impacts banditry
During her time as a Postdoctoral researcher, Fuoli spent many months of the coronavirus lockdowns examining the archives of the Foreign Ministry and the Ministry of Defence in Italy. Of key interest were historical documents related to the inception of Italian colonialism in East Africa.

“I set out to understand more mainly about Italian colonisation, and how the topography of the areas they tried to colonise impacted their interactions with local groups – Eritrea and Ethiopia are both hilly and mountainous. And, at this point, the newly founded Italian state had just emerged from around 10 years of fighting against endemic banditry in some equally hilly and mountainous areas in the south of the Peninsula. I was interested in the similarities there might be between the two contexts,” said Fuoli.
“This prompted me to think more about how banditry and anti-colonial resistance can intersect with topography. How did mountainous areas, for example, play a role in shaping empire and colonial societies in the 19th century? Whether one is exploring resistance in Eritrea and Ethiopia, or the inaccessible territory of the mountains of Afghanistan, one can see clearly how landscapes contribute to shaping groups such as gangs of bandits and brigands and also insurgents.”

“I began my research wondering whether there was an intrinsic link between mountain-dwelling populations and banditry. However, I soon realised that banditry is often embodied not by mountain-dwelling populations specifically, but rather by people living in hard-to-reach environments more broadly. It can be difficult to establish contact with such groups, and by consequence, they become harder to control. Populations in places that are remote typically evade state power more easily. One sees similar dynamics in hard-to-navigate areas like swamp areas, and even more hilly places such as in the south of Italy.

“Indeed, even in my childhood, I remember hearing about bandits in places like Calabria and Sardinia: there were bands of people who would kidnap people for money. I find it interesting how banditry is sometimes considered a long-ago phenomenon, and as having happened in Africa and Asia – but not so long ago, bandits also had a strong presence in southern Europe.”

How banditry adapts in response to capitalism and state presence
Fuoli’s findings make clear that banditry does not exist solely in response to economic concerns. It is not the case, for example, that banditry emerges only in response to economic strife, which bandits seek to remediate through highway robbery and plunder.

Rather, by examining the prevalence of banditry over time, Fuoli found that the emergence of state presence was what had the greatest impact on banditry.

“The advent of capitalism changed agrarian society,” Fuoli explained. “Capitalism went hand in hand with an increased concept of the state; an increase of state presence; and, in many cases, an increase in colonial influence and settlement.
“With state presence also comes the legal apparatus of the state – specifically, the judicial system, and police and policing. What became clear during my research is that when state presence grows – whether the state is a nation state or a colony – the social relationship with banditry changes, and bandits themselves are forced to adapt.

“When we think about the relationship between banditry and the modern state, we have to form a new conceptualisation about bandits. Modern states and colonial states typically have a hard time controlling categories of people such as nomads, vagrants, tribal people; groups of people seen as not being part of society, who instead exist at the margins of the state. Consequently, banditry – which was previously accepted as a part of society, even with its negative connotations – became marginalised, viewed as ‘other’; criminalised; and targeted by state forces.”

How banditry is remerging in the 21st century
Banditry is reemerging in the 21st century, such as in regions of Yemen and Somalia. However, the phenomenon of banditry today is different from how it was in the past.
Previously, banditry transformed because of its interaction with the state: the state became more powerful, and bandits had to adapt to their activities being criminalised. Now, banditry is evolving once more, but this time more because of a lack of state presence. When a state is incapable of maintaining a functioning ministry, military, and social services, banditry can emerge. Bandits today also profit from wide-ranging networks of trade, legal and illegal, that are integral to the globalised economy to further their activities.

Bandits by any other name
Fuoli also noted the challenge in even using the term ‘bandit’, and of ascribing it to different groups. “It’s like the debate about the word ‘terrorist’ today,” she said.

“When researching in the archives, I noticed how terms varied in describing different kinds of activities, depending on who was doing these activities. Ultimately, what one finds in an archive is written by the state – and the state does the labelling and tells the story.”