Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya and her contribution to the Russian, European and global criminology: historical and criminological research

Introduction

Crime has accompanied humanity since its birth, developing alongside with it, transforming under new conditions of life, and retaining its destructive potential. Over time, countering this phenomenon has received a scientific foundation in the form of a separate discipline – criminology. It not only studies crime, its causes, and a criminal personality, but also develops measures to control this negative phenomenon. Given the rich experience of humanity’s confrontation with crime, criminological research quite often begins with a review of the works of predecessors, starting with the founding fathers of this field of knowledge – Lambert-Adolph-Jacques Quetelet, Cesare Beccaria Bonesana, Jeremy Bentham, Cesare Lombroso and other specialists who became widely known and recognized in the global criminological science. To preserve the historical legacy of these authors, their works are periodically republished in various languages. In modern Russian criminological science, the works of these (Beccaria, 2004; Lombroso, 2004) and some other authors were published in the “Criminologist’s Library” series of the Moscow INFRA-M Publishing House (12 books in 2004–2016). In fact, for Russian readers of the 21^st century these works present the outstanding criminologists of the past, whose contribution to world criminology is recognized and appreciated by contemporaries. It should be noted that the world theoretical criminology development has led to the need for a new reading of the works of the world criminology classics and the formation of a new academic area – historical criminology. The latter should provide a space not only for the well-known works by the founders of criminology, but also for the works by undeservedly forgotten criminologists of the past.

Modern Russian criminology, being the successor of Soviet criminology, has generally retained its former structure and implies turning to historical issues of the science development. This is reflected not only in scientific works, but also in textbooks and tutorials. Over time, however, historical sections have increasingly focused on the latest criminology and less on the achievements of Soviet and pre-revolutionary Russian criminology. For unknown reasons, some representatives of criminological science of the past fall out of textbooks and monographs, and their works are consigned to oblivion. Among those who are not often mentioned by the Russian researchers and authors of criminology textbooks is our compatriot, an outstanding representative of world criminological science, Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya. It should be noted that several works devoted to her scientific achievements have appeared in modern Russian science, but they were of a general descriptive nature (Voroshilova, 2020) or touched upon her research on specific issues of counteraction to certain types of female crime (Belousov, 2013; Lopatyuk, 2020; Lugovenko, 2012). At the same time, there are so far no large-scale historical-criminological studies by Russian criminologists that allow adequately assessing P. N. Tarnovskaya’s contribution to world, European and Russian criminology. In this regard, we can talk about the scientific novelty of our historical-criminological research, while the introduction into the scientific circulation of undeservedly forgotten works of the author, published in Russia and abroad in foreign languages, constitute its practical and theoretical significance.

The study object is social relations regulating the counteraction to crime in general and some of its types in particular.

The study topics are the features of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s views on the sphere and methodology of anthropological studies of criminals, the specifics of her anthropological studies of criminals, and the influence of her studies on the world, European and Russian criminology development.

The study objective is to determine Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s contribution to the formation and development of world, European and Russian criminology.

The study tasks are to find, describe and evaluate:

– P. N. Tarnovskaya’s most significant scientific works published in Russia and, if necessary, to reintroduce them into the scientific circulation;

– P. N. Tarnovskaya’s most significant scientific works published outside Russia and to introduce them into the scientific circulation;

– works by P. N. Tarnovskaya’s contemporaries, reflecting her contribution to the development of Russian, European and world criminology;

– works by foreign specialists characterizing the influence of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works on the state and development of Russian, European and world criminology.

Research methodology and techniques. The methodological basis of the conducted research is dialectical materialism and the general scientific methods of cognition based on it, used in criminology. The main method of scientific research is the content analysis of scientific works by P. N. Tarnovskaya, reviews, comments and other information from specialists on P. N. Tarnovskaya’s published works.

The empirical base of our study includes:

– P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published in Russia and abroad – 48 units;

– reviews of P. N. Tarnovskaya's works published in scientific periodicals of the Russian Empire – 6 units;

– reviews of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published in scientific periodicals abroad – 24 units;

– reviews (abstracts) and other information on the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya, published in the Russian Empire and abroad – 57 units;

– obituaries published in Russian and foreign mass media in connection with the death of P. N. Tarnovskaya – 11 units;

– works by authors of different generations, containing an expert assessment of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific works and her contribution to the Russian, European and world criminology – 36 units;

– works of modern Russian criminologists reflecting the history of criminology and the history of counteraction to female criminality – 217 units.

The chronological framework of the research covers the period from 1872 to 1911. This is due to the fact that it was at this time that P. N. Tarnovskaya’s creative and organizational abilities to conduct criminological and anthropological research and publish their results were most fully manifested, and works containing an assessment of her work were published. At the same time, we have made certain exceptions to this period since her works and her contribution to the Russian, European, and world criminology has not yet been objectively fully evaluated. Discussions on Praskovya Nikolayevna’s contribution to criminological science are still going on in scientific periodicals.

The territorial scope of the study was not established by us due to a number of reasons. Firstly, P. N. Tarnovskaya was one of the leaders of Russian, European and world criminological science of the late 19^th – early 20^th century, her works were distributed all over the world, not limited to any one state or continent. Secondly, she lived at different times both in the Russian Empire and abroad (Paris and Nice, France; Rome, Italy). Thirdly, P. N. Tarnovskaya was fluent not only in literary Russian, but also in several foreign languages (German, French, Italian), in which a significant number of her scientific works were written.

Process and results of the research conducted

Prerequisites that influenced Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s intellectual curiosity and choice of profession

Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya was born in 1847 in the family of a famous military doctor, graduate of the Imperial Kazan University in 1833, Doctor of Medicine, Professor, full Privy Councillor Nikolay Illarionovich Kozlov. Her father was known not only for his works in the field of medicine, but also for his high positions in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and in the Military Department of the Russian Empire. Also, he was the Head of the Imperial Medical and Surgical Academy from 1869 to 1871, and later served as the Chief Military Medical Inspector. Professor N. I. Kozlov’s academic interests and works were connected with pathological changes in humans, and not only biological pathologies, but also social ones, for example, suicide (Kozlov, 1844). Researchers of N. I. Kozlov’s creative works and organizational abilities note his significant contribution to the development of Russian military medicine (Egorysheva, 2014; Krivenko, 1902; N. I. Kozlov, Chief..., 1878, p. 173). According to women doctors, his contribution also consisted in the fact that he was one of the initiators of the creation and formation of higher medical education for women in the Russian Empire (Dragnevich, 1893; On the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary..., 1903; Shabanova, 1886, 1904). Perhaps an additional factor that influenced her choice of medical profession was the fact that her father’s brother, Aleksandr Illarionovich Kozlov, a graduate of the Imperial Kazan University in 1836, Doctor of Medicine, Professor of Obstetrics and Women’s Diseases, Dean of the Medical Faculty of the same university (1863-1872), was also a successful researcher in the field of medicine¹ (Gruzdev, 1904). Undoubtedly, under the influence of the scientific views of her father, uncle, and, after her marriage, husband Veniamin Mikhailovich Tarnovsky, she made a decision to extend the dynasty of physicians and receive higher medical education. Veniamin Mikhailovich had the degree of Doctor of Medicine, the rank of Privy Councillor, and the position of Professor at the Imperial Medical and Surgical Academy. Later he was recognized as the founder of the Russian scientific school of venereology. He was an advocate of women’s higher medical education, as was Praskovya Nikolayevna’s father (Ashurkov, 1957). In 1872, P. N. Tarnovskaya entered the Women’s Higher Courses of Learned Midwives at Saint Petersburg Imperial Medical and Surgical Academy in order to receive medical education and engage in medical activity. During her studies, the Higher Courses of Learned Midwives were renamed the Women’s Higher Medical Courses at the Nikolayevskiy Military Hospital and the training period was extened from four to five years. She successfully graduated from these courses in 1878 and received a certificate and later a special “Woman doctor” insignia of distinction. During education, Praskovya Nikolayevna, as well as some other trainees, showed abilities to scientific research. This was due to the fact that during the entire period of training at the women’s medical courses the students conducted their own research, which were subsequently published in scientific periodicals not only in Russia, but also abroad. According to a brief list of scientific publications of students of these courses, published in the book of Peter Petrovich Sushchinsky, Doctor of Medicine, Ordinary Professor of the Military Medical Academy, who taught at the women’s medical courses, P. N. Tarnovskaya prepared four scientific publications on medicine during the period of training and existence of these courses (Sushchinsky, 1883, p. 32). The author of this list indicated, without reference to the sources of publications, the following titles of works belonging to P. N. Tarnovskaya: Dysthimia neuralgica, On the influence of acute processes on psychosis, On the influence of temperature on the development of spores of the fungi Penicillium glaucum and Rhizopus nigricas, and Abstract of Bilroth’s book: Untersuchungen uber die Vegetationsformen von Coccabactrien. When we were searching for these and other works by P. N. Tarnovskaya (Tarnovskaya, 1881a, 1881b, 1872, 1885b, 1884a, 1884b) and processed other information (critiques, comments, reviews) on her works, it turned out that at the beginning of her scientific path, a significant number of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works were devoted to specific issues of psychiatry (Kovalevsky, 1884a, 1884b). Some of the works were of high scientific value; therefore, their detailed written reviews were published in branch medical editions (Stepanov, 1881). The scientific interest in psychiatric research can be explained by the fact that after graduation Praskovya Nikolayevna worked as a doctor at the St. Nicholas the Wonderworker Psychiatric Hospital in Saint Petersburg from 1878 (St. Petersburg Psychiatric Hospital..., 2012; Svistun, 2015) to 1885². Later she began practicing medicine as a psychiatrist at home at the address: 104 Naberezhnaya reki Moiki, apt. 4, St. Petersburg³, where she lived with her husband. P. N. Tarnovskaya’s private practice allowed her to concentrate more on her research activities, which were supported by her father and her husband, who also actively performed scientific research not only in the field of medicine, but also in certain aspects of criminal anthropology, namely, features of deviant behavior of prostitutes (Prostitution..., 1890; Tarnovsky, 1890, 1888).

Due to the above, we can assume that the main prerequisites for Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s research in the field of criminal anthropology were:

– established internal striving for self-improvement when studying at women’s higher medical courses and in the family circle;

– a favorable environment that allowed her to conduct her own scientific research;

– support and organization of her creative abilities by close family members who had outstanding achievements in medicine (father, uncle, and husband);

– a high level of professional training, including not only knowledge, skills and abilities in medical and research activities, but also knowledge of several foreign languages.

Formation of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya as one of the major representatives of Russian, European and world criminal anthropology

Graduates from women’s higher medical courses, their graduates received special attention from society and the media. Most often, mass media wrote either about their significant achievements⁴, like the creation of special public organizations to help women doctors⁵, or about professional anniversaries, like the 20^th anniversary of the first graduation of women doctors. The professional activities of graduates of women’s medical courses, including the psychiatrist P. N. Tarnovskaya⁶ (Peterburzhets..., 1898) were positively assessed. However, although her medical practice and research in psychiatry was highly appreciated by specialists, it was her scientific research in criminal anthropology that brought her popularity and recognition in the scientific community. Criminal anthropology was fashionable at that time in Europe. P. N. Tarnovskaya’s involvement in research activity in this field was inspired by the works of Italian prison doctors, who actively presented the results of their anthropological studies of criminals at international events and published them in scientific periodicals. The works by Cesare Lombroso, Doctor of Medicine, Professor of psychiatry and criminal anthropology at the University of Turin, were of the greatest interest to contemporaries. It was these works that P. N. Tarnovskaya not only read in Italian and/or French, but expertly prepared reviews and detailed reports on them. Her first review, which became known in Russia, is a detailed comment on Cesare Lombroso’s monographic study “Genius and Insanity”, published in the specialized “Bulletin of Clinical and Forensic Psychiatry and Neuropathology” (Tarnovskaya, 1883). The above work by Cesare Lombroso, positively evaluated by P. A. Tarnovskaya, was later translated from Italian into Russian and published in Russia (Lombroso, 1885). A little later P. N. Tarnovskaya prepared and published in the same journal a review of the most popular C. Lombroso’s work on criminal anthropology “Criminal Man” (Tarnovskaya, 1885a). Alongside with studying foreign and Russian scientific literature on criminal anthropology, P. N. Tarnovskaya began to conduct her own anthropological studies of criminals and prostitutes in hospitals and penitentiary institutions of St. Petersburg. She reported her research results at public events of various levels, including the St. Petersburg Society of Psychiatrists, of which she became a member in early 1881. That was the first time in the Russian Empire when a woman doctor was elected the Society’s full member, so the news was immediately spread in the media under the “news”, “events”, “incidents”, and “chronicle” sections (Doctor Mrs. Tarnovskaya..., 1881). It should be noted that this high status, as a rule, was given to persons with merits in psychiatry: Doctors of Medicine, Heads of psychiatric hospitals (clinics). It is enough to cite only a short list of full members of this society (Academician Vladimir Mikhailovich Bekhterev; Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist Pavel Yakovlevich Rosenbach; Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist Vladimir Fedorovich Chizh), corresponding members (Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky; Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky; Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist Isaak Grigorievich Orshansky), deliberative members (lawyers Dmitry Andreyevich Dril, Anatoly Fedorovich Koni, Vladimir Dmitrievich Spasovich) (List of members of the Society..., 1888), whose names are still remembered by representatives of the Russian science, medicine and education.

It should be noted that initially P. N. Tarnovskaya’s anthropological studies were carried out on “habitual prostitutes” entering medical institutions of St. Petersburg to determine their sanity. Her first major study, the results of which were reported at the First Congress of Russian psychiatrists, held in Moscow from January 5 to 11, 1887, was “On Some Anthropological Measurements and Physical Signs of Degeneration in Habitual Prostitutes”. In this work, under the term “habitual prostitutes” the author understood (due to the theoretical significance of this definition, we quote its text verbatim with the author’s orthography and style preserved. – Note by P. K.) “those unfortunate women who live for several years in houses of tolerance, do not find their situation abnormal and do not voluntarily exchange it for a life of labor” (Tarnovskaya, 1887a, p. 885). For the sake of objectivity, completeness, and representativeness of her research, in order to identify anthropological features of 50 “habitual prostitutes” P. N. Tarnovskaya used two control groups for comparison: “1) intelligent women with higher education; 2) illiterate peasant women engaged in field work, 50 persons each” (Tarnovskaya, 1887a). Based on the study results, she concluded that the “habitual prostitutes” (84 %) had significant signs of physical degeneration compared to the representatives of the control groups. The causes of such anomalies were several objective factors. The first cause was parental drunkenness – 82 % of prostitutes had both or one of their parents who were drunkards. The second cause was parental pulmonary tuberculosis in 12% of them and hereditary syphilis in 4%. The third cause was that 18 % of prostitutes were the last children in a family of 8, 10, or 13 children who died at a young age. Given that, according to foreign experts, prostitutes gave birth to 0.6 % of children who later died in infancy, the author concluded that there was a degeneration of “habitual prostitutes”, i. e. a decreased possibility of the family prolongation. At the same time, the author believed that “habitual prostitutes” were predisposed to nervous and mental illnesses, hence, specialists should investigate the connection between prostitution and mental illnesses using statistical data (Tarnovskaya, 1887a, pp. 891–893). According to Boris Samsonovich Greidenberg, Doctor of Medicine, privat-docent of Kharkov University, who participated in that event, P. N. Tarnovskaya’s speech was accompanied by “mass applause” (Greidenberg, 1887). The work of P. N. Tarnovskaya, presented as a scientific report, in addition to being published in the Proceedings of the First Congress of Russian Psychiatrists, was published as a separate imprint (brochure) due to the demand (Tarnovskaya, 1887b) and began to be distributed not only in the Russian Empire (Tarnovskaya, 1903, p. 302; 1894a, 1892a), but also abroad. While in Russia this scientific work was treated rather calmly, it received positive responses among foreign specialists, including the Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine at the University of Siena (Rome, Italy), Doctor of Medicine, Professor Salvatore Ottolenghi, one of the disciples of the legendary Cesare Lombroso (Ottolenghi, 1888).

Continuing her research in criminal anthropology, P. N. Tarnovskaya prepared a unique work “Anthropometric studies of female prostitutes, thieves and healthy peasant women – field workers” and reported it at the regular meeting of the Society of Psychiatrists of St. Petersburg on November 21, 1887 (Tarnovskaya, 1888). The report aroused lively interest and discussion among Russian psychiatric specialists (Drs. Nizhegorodtsev, Danillo, Chechetta, Rosenbach, Merzhevsky, etc.) at the meeting (Appendix..., 1888, pp. 62–65) and began to be disseminated in brief form in professional medical periodicals (Blumenau, 1887). The report aroused sincere scientific interest among foreign specialists, and its abstracts were translated and published in foreign scientific periodicals (Hinze, 1888). Later this report was revised, translated into French and published in 1889 in France by the Parisian Leerosnier and Bade Publishing House as a monograph. The title of this monographic work was changed and abbreviated to “Anthropometric Study of Female Prostitutes and Thieves”. The full title of the work on the title page was “Etude Anthropométrique sur les Prostituées et les Voleuses. With eight anthropometric tables and twenty wood-cuts”, and the more accurate one on the next page: “Etude Anthropométrique sur les Prostituées et les Voleuses. Avec 8 Tableaux Anthropometriques et 20 Dessins” (Tarnowsky, 1889). The volume of the work grew considerably not only due to additional research results and new literary sources, but also due to the inclusion of annexes in the form of anthropometric tables of female criminals (prisoners from the infirmary of the Lithuanian Castle women’s ward) and prostitutes (syphilis patients from Kalinkinskaya Hospital in St. Petersburg, which in 1922 was named after Veniamin Mikhailovich Tarnovsky, Praskovia Nikolaevna’s husband). The publication received a wide resonance in the academic community in Europe, and subsequently throughout the world. A considerable number of comments (abstracts) and full reviews of the work were published in the leading European scientific editions (in France (Melikoff, 1895), Germany (Joseph, 1890; Tarnowski, 1892), Italy (Mingazzini, 1891), Great Britain (A study of Russian Prostitutes..., 1890; Bertram & Windle, 1890), Belgium (J. M., 1890), Czech Republic (Nove casopsy..., 1891), and America (Etude Anthropométrique..., 1890; W. L. W., 1890). In total, we found and described 43 sources in different languages, including 15 comments and 28 reviews or other information, including trade advertisements on this work. Foreign experts highly estimated this scientific work, pointing out its impartiality, empiricality, accuracy and logical conclusions drawn by the author. This estimation influenced the work’s future fate, because after a short period in 1892 it was republished by the same publishing house. Here we could have finished the description of the work’s fate, but life sometimes brings unexpected surprises – the revival of interest in the past, including the most significant scientific works published earlier. However, we will turn to this side of the revival of interest, to the mentioned work by P. N. Tarnovskaya, later, in the appropriate section of this article.

The world recognition of the scientific results obtained did not besot P. N. Tarnovskaya. She continued to actively carry out research, reporting results at public events of various levels and publishing them in periodicals. As was noted in the weekly medical newspaper “Vrach”, the members of the Russian Society for the Protection of Public Health (at a meeting held there on February 26, 1890) were impressed by Dr. P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report on the research on female thieves (Gruzdev, 1890, p. 43). The report summary entitled “Female thieves (anthropological study)” was published in the March issue of the “Russkoye bogatstvo” journal with the title changed by the editors “Women Thieves. A Study by Mrs. Tarnovskaya” (Women Thieves, 1890). The full version of the research results was published in Issue 5 of the Journal of the Russian Society for the Preservation of Public Health in 1891 (Tarnovskaya, 1891a), and anthropometric tables as a supplement to this work were published in Issue 6 of the same scientific periodical (Tarnovskaya, 1891b). As a logical consequence, based on the research results, P. N. Tarnovskaya published in a small edition of 350 copies (Tarnovskaya, 1891c, 1891d) another major scientific work entitled “Female Thieves. Anthropological study” (Tarnovskaya, 1891e) in St. Petersburg in 1891, which did not receive a wide resonance in the Russian academic community. We found only one positive review of this work, written by Professor Pavel Ivanovich Kovalevsky, Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist (Kovalevsky, 1892) and several informational announcements about this publication and possibilities to purchase it (P. N. Tarnovskaya. “Female Thieves”, 1892; Tarnovskaya, 1894b, 1892d). In our opinion, the scientific value of this work lay in the fact that, for the first time in the world criminal anthropology, it classified women thieves on the following grounds: occupation; mental abilities; the state of emotional sphere. Four large groups were distinguished: 1) habitual thieves; 2) prostitute thieves; 3) psychopathic thieves; 4) casual thieves. According to the author, the common features of the first two categories were that they were necessarily recidivists; repentance and their return to an honest life were out of the question. Thieves-psychopaths were usually mentally ill; the theft committed was similar to various other misdemeanors, senseless like many deeds committed by mentally ill persons; for example, they did not conceal what they had done and did not value the appropriated thing, often abandoning it altogether. P. N. Tarnovskaya subdivided the group of habitual thieves according to the type of activity and techniques developed into household thieves, shoplifters, fencing thieves, hallway thieves, pocket thieves, and beggar thieves.

In our opinion, some conclusions are of scientific value, which have not lost their significance in modern conditions. Firstly, the work experimentally proved the connection of habitual thieves’ behavior with hereditary mental and other diseases, as well as drunkenness. Secondly, it was proved that the causes of thieves’ criminal behavior, in addition to heredity, are unfavorable living conditions (unfavorable external environment) without educational influence or development of inclinations to work. Thirdly, it was shown that punitive measures cannot reduce theft and other forms of women’s deviant behavior until society’s attention is drawn to the roots of this evil, the spread of disease, drunkenness, etc. At the same time, the author believed that as schools with proper instruction in the trades emerge, as women are allowed to enter various professions, more and more women would find an honest living; and as the population is educated, hereditary transmission of diseases would diminish, and the result would be a decrease in the number of “vicious women”. This work was later referred to by the Russian researchers specializing in criminal anthropology and criminology (Esipov, 1896, p. 248; 1900, p. 112).

Continuing to study the works by European criminal anthropologists, in December 1891, P. N. Tarnovskaya carried out their analytical review and prepared a report entitled “New works in criminal anthropology”. This report was presented by the author at the meeting of the 1^st section of the Russian Society for the Preservation of Public Health on December 27, 1891. The review prepared by P. N. Tarnovskaya included the following works: Cesare Lombroso (2^nd edition of “Criminal Anthropology”, 1890. (Lombrozo, 1896)), criticized by Enrico Ferri and defended by her from undue attacks; and an article by Cesare Lombroso and his disciple, Doctor of Medicine Salvatore Ottolenghi, entitled “Female Criminal and Prostitute” (Lombroso e Ottolenghi, 1891), which appeared in the scientific journal of the Royal Italian Academy of Medicine in issues 9–10 of 1891. When reviewing the work by C. Lombroso, P. N. Tarnovskaya draws attention to three main conclusions reached by him: 1) it is necessary to study prison science in educational institutions that train lawyers; 2) in the scientific field, a criminal personality should be studied more, and 3) the study of a criminal should take place in places of detention. Also, the author of the report critically evaluated the shrewd comments by Enrico Ferri on this paper, drawing attention to the critic’s lack of sufficient empirical data to diminish the natural scientists’ advances in the field of criminal anthropology. A significant portion of the analytical review was devoted to an article by C. Lombroso and S. Ottolenghi, where she found an additional empirical confirmation of her previous results on female criminality and brought it to the attention of those present. This is indeed true; moreover, the mentioned authors of the article quite often – 11 times in the paper – referred to P. N. Tarnovskaya’s results. In the end of the analytical review, she formulated the slogan of criminal anthropology: “Not to punish the evil will, but to correct the weak and sick ones – that is what humanity should strive for”. The report was published in the 2^nd issue of the Journal of the Russian Society for the Preservation of Public Health in 1892 (Tarnovskaya, 1892b) and as a separate edition (Tarnovskaya, 1892c), while its brief abstract was published in “Vrach” weekly newspaper (Frants, 1892). Information about additional publication of this work is confirmed by advertisements about its sale placed by the publishing house in various information sources⁷ (Tarnovskaya, 1891c; 1891d). As a result of intense professional and scientific activity, on March 6, 1892, by the decision of the general meeting of the Russian Society for the Preservation of Public Health, doctor Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya was elected a full member of this society (New members of the society..., 1892). At the same time, foreign researchers begin not only to quote the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya, but also to borrow a significant part of her research results when preparing their monographs. One of such works was the monograph by a French criminologist, Dr. Emile Laurent, “Criminal Anthropology and New Theories of Crime. With portraits of 11 French and foreign criminologists outside the text” (Dr. Emile Laurent, 1891, pp. 101–108). When preparing Ch. 12 “Criminality of Women”, the author almost entirely referred not to his own research results, but to the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya and partially to the works by C. Lombroso. This was done without reference to specific works, only indicating this fact at the end (Dr. Emile Laurent, 1891, p. 155). Cesare Lombroso gave essential scientific, professional and comradely emotional support to Praskovya Nikolaevna by constantly referring to her research in his works on criminal anthropology (Lombroso, 1893, pp. 74, 77, 80, 89; 1894, pp. 86, 108, 133, 135, 451, 453). So did some other foreign experts in the field of criminal anthropology (Hans, 1892, pp. 28, 49–50).

P. N. Tarnovskaya’s research and publication activity gathered pace. In the early 1890s, she began to publish more frequently in leading European scientific journals. During that period, her articles appeared in the Italian journal “Archives d'anthropologie criminelle de criminologie et de psychologie normale et pathologique”. Of the greatest importance are her works in Italian “On the sensory organs of female criminals and prostitutes” (Tarnowsky, 1893a), “Physiognomy of a Russian prostitute” (Tarnowsky, 1893b) and her joint article with C. Lombroso “Russian criminal photography” (Tarnowsky & Lombroso, 1893), published in the above-mentioned journal, whose editor-in-chief was her outstanding co-author. The burst of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s publication activity was also due to the fact that on August 7–13, 1892, the Third International Congress of Criminal Anthropology was held in Brussels. There she delivered her report “On the sensory organs of female criminals”, which was discussed by the forum participants. This report was subsequently published in the Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Criminal Anthropology (Tarnovsky, 1893). P. N. Tarnovsky’s participation in the Third International Congress of Criminal Anthropology was her triumph: she delivered her report and defended her findings and main points in a heated discussion with Doctor of Medicine Paul Adolf Näcke, a psychiatrist from Leipzig who had published a monograph on female criminality in Germany in 1884. Subsequently, the discussion continued with the Congress Vice-President, Dr. Paul Heger, Professor of Psychology at the University of Brussels, and the Congress President, Moritz Benedikt, Professor of Neurology at the University of Vienna (Discussion: MM. Näcke, Heger, Benedikt, Mm. Tarnovsky, 1893). Praskovya Nikolayevna actively participated in the work of the Congress, including debates on the speakers’ reports, for which she was honored with applause from the forum participants (Actes du troisième..., 1893, p. 277). Her active position at the Forum earned her special attention of the organizers: Dr. Emile Houze, President of the Belgian Society of Anthropologists, Professor of Anthropology at the Free University of Brussels (Actes du troisième..., 1893, p. 283) and the above mentioned Paul Heger (Actes du troisième..., 1893, p. 470).

Our compatriot V. F. Chizh submitted a brief note on the Third International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, held in Brussels, with his remarks, to the “Issues of Philosophy and Psychology” journal (Chizh, 1893), not forgetting to mention P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report (Chizh, 1893, p. 5). The positive scientific activity of Praskovya Nikolayevna at the Congress was also marked by foreign specialists in their

written reviews of this international scientific event (Bournet, 1893, pp. 471, 486, 514; C. L., 1892; J. M., 1892, pp. 277-278). During that period, criminal anthropology intensively developed scientific literature was in demand, including P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published in scientific periodicals. As a result, there appeared additional reprints of some of her works in the form of brochures, which were distributed all over the world. Among these works was the above-mentioned article “Sur les Organs des sens des femmes criminelles et des prostituées”, highly praised by specialists (Gurrieri, 1893) and published as a separate edition (Tarnowsky, 1893c). According to the catalog of library materials, a copy of this work is now in the collection of the University Library of Nagoya University, Chuo Hasegawa University in Japan⁸. In the same period, but before the international forum in Brussels, a joint article in French by P. N. Tarnowsky and Loris Melikoff, devoted to the anthropological study of female prostitutes and thieves, entitled “Etudes anthropométriques sur les prostitués et les voleuses” (Tarnowsky, 1892), appeared in the “Bulletins and Memoirs of the Paris Society of Anthropology”.

Actively continuing anthropological studies of female criminals, P. N. Tarnowskaya prepared a report for the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology in Geneva. At the same time, Praskovya Nikolayevna took an active part in discussing the results of scientific research on criminal anthropology in Russia, conducted by not only doctors⁹, but also lawyers at the Law Faculty of St. Petersburg University. For example, on February 4, 1895, she took part in a meeting of the University’s department for criminal studies chaired by I. Ya. Foynitsky when D. A. Dril’s report on crime prevention and repression in accordance with the criminal’s personal characteristics was discussed¹⁰.

According to American researchers, in April 1894, P. N. Tarnovskaya participated in the International Medical Congress in Rome with the report “Anthropometria di donne assassine e confronto con normale” (Manley, 1894, p. 45). This is confirmed by the Congress materials published in an Italian periodical (XI Congresso Medico, 1894, p. 111).

At the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, held in Geneva from August 24 to 29, 1896, P. N. Tarnovskaya made a report “Female Criminality”, in which she presented a summary of an anthropological study of female murderers, and also announced a new monograph. The paper she prepared and presented at the Congress was approved and supported by the participants and published in the proceedings of this international forum (Tarnowsky, 1897). Moreover, the research results were additionally published in Russian in the form of scientific articles in “Severny Vestnik” journal. Almost a year after the Congress, this journal published her major article entitled “Criminal Anthropology and Criminality of Women” (Tarnowsky, 1897), and another year later one more work, “Female Criminality in Connection with Early Marriage” (Tarnowsky, 1898). Notably, the latter article was preliminarily discussed at a meeting of the Russian Women’s Mutual Charity Society on March 24, 1898¹¹. It should be noted that these works do not reproduce verbatim the main theses of the report published in the Congress proceedings, but are substantially revised and supplemented. In the articles we have mentioned, she drew attention to women’s crimes against the family, primarily murder, including husband-murder and infanticide, and also described their main causes and presented her own classification of the motives for crimes committed by women.

The content of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s “Female Criminality” – report at the Geneva Congress – was most completely rendered in the Russian language by Vladimir Petrovich Serbsky, Doctor of Medicine, psychiatrist, Professor at Moscow University, in his review of the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology (Serbsky, 1896, p. 443–446). In it he also mentioned that the main points of the study would be published in a separate book. The similar content of the same P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report was outlined by another Congress participant, Doctor of Medicine Pavel Yakovlevich Rosenbach, in his review of this international forum (Rosenbach, 1896, p. 177-179). According to both, P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report was positively evaluated by Cesare Lombroso and other participants. At the same time, the most informative in assessing the procedure and results of the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology was the review prepared by Senator, Privy Councillor Ignatiy Platonovich Zakrevsky and published as a separate work – a report (Zakrevsky, 1897a) and its extended version (Zakrevsky, 1897b)¹², as well as a journal article entitled “Criminal Anthropology at the Geneva International Congress” (Zakrevsky, 1897c). In these works, the author describes in detail not only the content of the main speeches, but also individual issues that arose when discussing these reports. The most valuable for our study was the description of Cesare Lombroso’s assessments of P. N. Tarnovskaya and her anthropological research. In particular, it is his mentioning of P. N. Tarnovskaya as having shown genius in science that revealed criminal anthropology for Russia (Zakrevsky, 1897c, p. 67). After hearing P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report “Female Criminality”, he called her “sister in arms” during the discussion (Zakrevsky, 1897c, p. 92). The author of the review I. P. Zakrevsky specially emphasized that P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report on Russian female criminals was delivered in elegant French with impeccable pronunciation and pleasant intonation (Zakrevsky, 1897c, p. 91). Other authors summarized the contents of this report briefly, succinctly and relatively fully in the reports on the International Congress of Criminal Anthropology published in Russian scientific journals (Postovsky, 1897) and partially in other materials¹³. Doctor of Medicine Vladimir Fedorovich Chizh, chief physician of St. Panteleimon City Hospital at the Resurrection Church in St. Petersburg, Professor of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Yuryev, who participated in the Congress, referred to the absence of a written abstract of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s report on female criminality and gave a positive assessment of her presentation. He made this conclusion without describing the report content in the end of his review of the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology (Chizh, 1896, p. 944). P. N. Tarnovskaya’s speech was also positively evaluated by other participants who prepared and published their reviews of this Congress (Sikorsky, Barshevsky, 1897), including foreign observers (Marie, 1896, p. 162; Martin Etienne, 1896, p. 483; Quatrième Congres..., 1896, pp. 500-501, 512, 517; Räcke, 1897; The Fourth international congress..., 1896). As a result of the Congress of Criminal Anthropology, P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific authority increased significantly in the eyes of specialists all over the world. As a result, Cesare Lombroso, the founder of the Italian school of criminal anthropology, in the next reprint of his work “Criminal Anthropology” (Lombrozo, 1896) in French in Paris stated that the work was dedicated to “the apostles of criminal anthropology in Europe”. Among the 17 European criminal anthropologists who made a significant contribution to the formation and development of this scientific field, he pointed out two Russians: lawyer Dmitry Andreevich Dril and psychiatrist Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya (Lombrozo, 1896, p. V). P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific, organizational, professional and oratorical abilities were highly appreciated by her Russian colleagues in the medical field. In the “Chronicle and Small News” section of “Vrach” weekly medical newspaper in 1897 they pointed out that only five women doctors were capable of teaching medicine in Russia – Arkhangelskaya, Pavlovskaya, Serebryannikova, Tarnovskaya (emphasis added by the author – Note by P. K.) and Shabanova¹⁴. In the scientific sphere, the results of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s anthropological research related to female criminality were recognized. For example, K. A. Belilovsky in his doctoral thesis “On the Issue of the Anthropological Type of a Criminal”, defended in 1895, repeatedly referred to her book “Female Thieves. An Anthropological Study” (Belilovsky, 1895, p. 55, 94, 97).

Continuing her studies of women criminals, P. N. Tarnovskaya took part in the Fifth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, held in Amsterdam from September 9 to 14, 1901, but she did not deliver a report. This is evidenced by the review of this event, conducted by V. F. Chizh and published in the journal “Issues of Philosophy and Psychology” at the end of 1901 (Chizh, 1901), as well as by a similar review by D. A. Dril, published in the journal of the Ministry of Justice (Dril, 1901). Moreover, Praskovya Nikolayevna prepared her own review of the Fifth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, which was published in two issues of the journal “Review of Psychiatry, Neurology and Experimental Psychology” in 1901, No. 11 (Tarnovskaya, 1901a) and No. 12 (Tarnovskaya, 1901b), and later as a separate brochure (Tarnovskaya, 1901c). The value of this review lies in the fact that the author, based on its results, pointed out the main issues facing criminal anthropology and the mechanisms proposed by the speakers for their resolution, while emphasizing the special importance of crime prevention (Tarnovskaya, 1901b, p. 932–933). In addition, during this period Praskovya Nikolayevna prepared and published her work “Review of Medical Education of Russian Women” (Tarnowsky, 1900) in the French language. Later it was republished in the genre of a historical essay under the new title “Women’s Medical Institute and Women’s Medical Courses. Historical Sketch” in “Vestnik Evropy” journal in 1903 in the Russian language (Tarnovskaya, 1903). The French version of this work is still in demand by the world historical science and is regularly reprinted (Tarnowsky, 2021).

Completing an anthropological study of female criminality in April 1901, Praskovya Nikolayevna prepared a major monograph “Female killers” (Tarnovskaya, 1902), which was published in 1902 in St. Petersburg by the “Partnership for Artistic Printing” Publishing House in 600 copies (Tarnovskaya, 1903). The value of this work lies in the fact that for the first time in criminal anthropology it developed the criteria of criminological grouping of female murderers, offered their classification, and revealed the etiology of women’s criminal behavior. P. N. Tarnovskaya divided all female murderers into five groups (categories): murderers under the influence of passion or passionate impulse (passion murderers); murderers with suppressed perception, which were divided into subgroups; murderers on the basis of sexual deviations; murderers with nervous and mental diseases; and accidental (unintentional) murderers. The first subgroup included passion killers: self-interest killers; maternal love killers; sexual love killers; jealousy killers; revenge killers; killers due to accumulation of grudges; and hate and cruelty killers. The second subgroup was divided into the following types of female murderers: murderers with blunted moral sense and infant killers (Tarnovskaya, 1902, p. 98–99). The author’s comprehensive criminological research (anthropological measurements, analysis of court verdicts, and in-depth surveys (interviews) of female murderers) allowed her to come to conclusions that are relevant till today. P. N. Tarnovskaya singled out the main causes of murders committed by women: unfavorable heredity (psychiatric and other diseases (alcoholism, syphilis, tuberculosis) of close relatives); unfavorable social environment. It was therefore proposed to ensure individualization in imposing punishment on women, taking into account their biological characteristics and social conditions. Moreover, she was convinced that working with those sentenced to imprisonment should be performed by persons with relevant professional training. Speaking about the prospects for criminal anthropology development, she noted that “strictly scientific views should become the basis of modern criminology” (Tarnovskaya, 1902, p. 497), and its main goal is to develop the crime etiology and prevention (Tarnovskaya, 1902, p. 498). There are many provisions in the work, which in modern conditions sound differently, but they are of scientific value for Russian, European and world criminology.

The publication of this comprehensive study as a separate book was rather cautiously perceived by the Russian specialists. The work was positively assessed by V. F. Chizh, who published a short review in the “Review of Psychiatry, Neurology and Experimental Psychology” journal (Chizh, 1902). Another positive review was given by a graduate of the Faculty of Medicine and former privat-docent of the Imperial Kazan University, Doctor of Medicine (Vorotynsky, 1897), chief physician of Odessa Psychiatric Hospital Bronislaw Ivanovich Vorotynsky (Vorotynsky, 1902). The reviewer, having appropriate qualifications and publications on criminal anthropology (Vorotynsky, 1901, 1900), noted the scientific value, importance, significance of this work for criminal anthropology, the proportionality of the book’s price and quality. Later a brief review of this book by a historian A. Feresov was published in the “Istoricheskiy Vestnik” journal (Feresov, 1903). A detailed positive review of the monographic study by P. N. Tarnovskaya was published in 1904 in “Russkaya Mysl” journal as an editorial in the bibliographic section “Medicine” (Review of the book..., 1904). Several foreign specialists, including an Argentine criminologist Carlos Galli (Galli, 1903) and a German medical anthropologist Dr. Richard Weinberg-Dorpat, also positively evaluated the published work (Weinberg-Dorpat, 1904). After the publication, Praskovya Nikolayevna continued to improve it, conducted additional studies of certain issues and published their results abroad (Tarnowsky, 1907a; 1907b). At the same time, she began to translate the text into French, while taking part in the activities of the Russian Society for the Preservation of Public Health.

To maintain her professional skills, P. N. Tarnovskaya practiced medicine, preseerving the high status of a woman doctor. Information about it can be found in the Alphabetical List of Women Doctors of the Russian Medical List, published by the Medical Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in 1904 with the following personal data “Kozlova-Tarnovskaya Prask. Nik. zh.-vr SPB” (Russian Medical List..., 1904).

In 1906 Praskovya Nikolayevna participated in the Sixth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, held in Turin from April 28 to May 3, 1906, where she gave a presentation “Traitement des femmes criminelles” ¹⁵. Her participation in this scientific event was mentioned in foreign (Locard Edmon, 1906; Storck, 1906) and Russian scientific publications (Portugalov, 1907, p. 71). After this event P. N. Tarnovskaya suffered a great misfortune – on May 18, 1906 her husband Veniamin Mikhailovich Tarnovsky died in Paris¹⁶.

The deterioration of health caused by the death of her husband in 1906 did not allow Praskovya Nikolaevna to actively participate in the scientific, social and medical life of St. Petersburg and reduced the intensity of her scientific work. She stopped practicing medicine, but continued to conduct research. The next year in the address and reference book of St. Petersburg for 1907, instead of the traditional record “Tarnovskaya (Kozlova) Prask. Nik. zh.-vr [woman doctor]” was replaced by the abbreviation defining her social and legal status “vd.ts.”, which meant “the widow of a privy councilor^”17.

In 1907, Praskovya Nikolayevna, while in the French city of Nice, finalized her monograph “Female killers” in the French language. In 1908, the work was published in Paris by the same publisher where it had been published earlier, Félix Alcan (Tarnowsky, 1908a). Immediately after the title page, on a separate page, P. N. Tarnovskaya wrote that she dedicated this work to the founder of criminal anthropology, Professor Cesare Lombroso. This is how verbatim it is indicated in the work: “Au Createur a l'initiateur de l'anthropologie criminelle le professour Cesar Lombroso je dedie traveil. Pauline Tarnowsky”, which means “To the creator and initiator of criminal anthropology, Professor Cesar Lombroso, I dedicate my work”¹⁸.

The release of this work was anticipated by the representatives of medical science, because it was announced by the author as early as at the Geneva International Congress of Criminal Anthropology. The book published by P. N. Tarnovskaya received a wide resonance in the European and world scientific community. Scientific periodicals published extensive positive reviews of this anthropological study of female murderers, including by the founder of criminal anthropology, C. Lombroso (Lombroso, 1908). Among the authoritative reviewers who supported the publication, two Americans should be mentioned: Adolf Meyer, Doctor of Medicine, Professor of Psychiatry, Director of the Pathology Institute of New York State Hospital System (Meyer, 1908), and Arthur MacDonald (MacDonald, 1910), the author of the first tutorial on criminology in the United States (Criminology, 1893).

Horacio P. Areco, an authoritative Latin American criminologist, Doctor of Sciences, Professor of the Department of Legal Psychology, member of the Institute of Criminology of the National Penitentiary System from Buenos Aires, in his small review also positively evaluated the results of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s anthropological study of female murderers (Horacio Areco, 1908). According to modern Argentine specialists, at that time Horacio Areco was one of the leading criminologists not only in Argentina but also in South America (Miceli et al., 2011).

Tarnovskaya’s British colleague, Doctor of Medicine Charles Buckman Goring, a prison doctor from London (Goring, 1909), who is considered one of the pioneers of English criminology in his country (Edwin D. Driver, 1957), commented positively on her research. Quite expectedly, positive responses to P. N. Tarnowsky’s monographic study were also published in European scientific journals from other less well-known European specialists (Buttersack, 1908b; Tarnowsky, 1908; Ray J., 1906–1907; Russa: anthropology..., 1908; Tarnowsky, 1912; 1908). These reviews and comments marked her sincere belief in the significance of her anthropological research, her scrupulousness and boundless diligence in collecting extensive empirical material, the logic, reasoning and depth of her scientific conclusions and formulated proposals, as well as her critical attitude towards the works of other authors in the absence of scientific empirically proven arguments. According to some favorable reviewers, the publication of this work influenced the development of not only European, but also world criminal anthropology, especially the studies of female criminality. These conclusions would later be confirmed by researchers of other generations. Undoubtedly, all of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works are based on reliable biological (anthropometric) data, including heredity; they also reflect additional important empirically obtained data, such as the state of mental health, the socio-legal characteristics of the committed acts, and the motivation of women’s criminal behavior. A famous Russian criminal anthropologist Professor V. F. Chizh rightly pointed out that such detailed studies on criminal anthropology were scarce not only in the Russian but also in the world literature (Chizh, 1902).

The publication of this work was the final stage of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s active research as a criminal anthropologist. Although she continued publishing works on some socially significant issues, this work was less intensive (Tarnovskaya, 1908). The last work of this author known to us was dedicated to the memory of Cesare Lombroso and evaluation of his scientific contribution; it was published in the “Pravo” weekly legal newspaper on December 13, 1909 (Tarnovskaya, 1909). Exactly one year after the publication of the above article, on December 12, 1910, P. N. Tarnovskaya died. The mournful news of her death was reflected in periodicals not only in the Russian Empire, but also in many countries of the world. Obituaries in the Russian language were published in the Russian periodicals such as “Vestnik Evropy”¹⁹, “Prakticheskiy vrach”²⁰, “Russkaya Mysl”²¹, and as separate reprints of her works²² (In Memory of doctors-anthropologists..., 1911). Information about the death of P. N. Tarnovskaya quickly spread throughout Europe and America, where condolences in connection with her death were also expressed. Obituaries appeared in such journalsas “Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology” (USA) (Wigmore, 1911), “Archives of Criminal Anthropology, Criminology, Normal and Pathological Psychology” (Italy) (Nécrologie..., 1911), “Archives of Criminal Anthropology, Psychiatry and Forensic Medicine, the official organ of the Italian Association of Forensic Medicine and Insurance” (Italy) (Necrolo..., 1911). The obituaries praised her scientific, medical and social work, as well as her significant contribution to the development of criminal anthropology. Italian specialists even called her “one of the most intelligent, cultured and kind propagandists of criminal anthropology” (dell piufevleli, colte e gentile propagatrici della Antropologie Criminale) (Necrologio..., 1911), and Americans considered her “an outstanding scholar” and “the leading female criminologist in Europe” (Wigmore, 1911).

The analysis of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works, reviews, comments, essays, abstracts and other information about this researcher, archival and other materials about her studies, professional and social activities that we have studied allows drawing some preliminary conclusions. First, the area of anthropological research chosen by her was in demand more in the European and world academic communnity than in the Russian one. Second, her comprehensive studies of female criminals were more in demand abroad (Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, England, USA, Argentina), where she was widely known as a conscientious researcher, than in the Russian Empire. Third, her work was endorsed and supported by the most respected experts in European and world criminal anthropology, including its founder, Cesare Lombroso, his disciplines and followers. Fourth, she is one of the few Russian researchers of criminal anthropology, if not the only one, who published their works in co-authorship with Cesare Lombroso. Fifth, the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya on criminal anthropology most popular in the world scientific community were published in the late 19^th–20^th century in foreign languages (French, Italian, and German) and an insignificant part of them in the Russian lannguage.

Period of waning interest in the works and personality of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya in the Russian criminology

In the course of social changes in Russia in the early 20^th century and the absolute victory of socialist ideas in criminology, pre-revolutionary criminological and anthropological studies were subjected to distortion, silence and unfair criticism. For example, V. A. Vnukov’s article “Female Murderers”, published in 1928 in the collection “Murders and Murderers”, twice mentions the results of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s study of female murderers. However, the bibliography (a literature index, as written in the text. – Note by P. K.) at the end of the article does not contain any literature sources by the author he cited (Vnukov, 1928). In later periods of the Soviet criminology development, references to anthropological studies of criminals in pre-revolutionary Russia practically ceased; even in the studies of a criminal personality, it was pointed out that biological (anthropological) theories of the causes of crime were bourgeois, reactionary and anti-scientific theories²³ (Herzenzon, 1965; 1967). Soviet criminologists sometimes recalled anthropological studies of criminals only when describing historical aspects of the study of criminallity in pre-revolutionary Russia without deeply analyzing the essence of these studies because of their “bourgeois pseudo-scientific nature” (Ostroumov, 1980).

The approach widely used in Soviet criminology, which ignored the results of anthropological research, has led to the fact that in Soviet and modern Russian criminology, the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya were unclaimed and practically forgotten. Only a few Russian criminologists referred or refer to her works in the study of female criminality (Yu. M. Antonyan (2023), V. V. Luneev (2009) and some others (Rostovskaya et al., 2022)), crime prevention (E. B. Kurguzkina (2003)) or the history of the Russian criminology (A. I. Dolgova²⁴, G. F. Khokhryakov²⁵, G. N. Gorshenkov (2015; 2016, pp. 58–88), L. M. Prozumentov and A. V. Shesler²⁶). Unfortunately, the above authors mention only some works that were published in the Russian language. As a result, it seems that the Russian criminologists are not even aware of her major works in foreign languages. This is confirmed by checking the citations of her works in foreign languages on the platform of the Russian Scientific Electronic Library as of January 1, 2024, where there are no citations by Russian authors of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific works published abroad. However, her works in Russian were also cited 123 times only, including distorted bibliographic information. At the same time, in pre-revolutionary science, even the apparent opponents of the anthropological approach to the study of a criminal personality did not forget to point out P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published not only in the Russian Empire, but also abroad in foreign languages (Gernet, 1911, p. 98; Esipov, 1900, p. 89; Zeland, 1899, pp. 5, 14; Obozenko, 1896, p. 62; Petri, 1894, p. 98; 1895, p. 246; Sabinin, 1905, p. 92; Foynitsky, 1893, pp. 127, 163–164).

Our analysis of modern literature sources on criminology (dissertations, monographs, textbooks and tutorials), 217 in total, allows stating with bitterness that for modern Russian criminologists the name of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya is practically unknown, as well as her scientific works published abroad. Moreover, as unfortunate as it is to state, even in 2023 – the year of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s 175^th anniversary – not a single Russian criminological scientific publication mentioned that date.

Revival of interest in the scientific works of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya in the world criminological science

Appealing to the scientific results of the past allows us to avoid mistakes made by predecessors and to use their research in new conditions for our own scientific growth and for improving the effectiveness of professional activity. This obvious truth allows us to significantly reduce the research load when assessing criminal phenomena and processes. The ideological ban on referring to the works of pre-revolutionary criminologists, including those belonging to the sphere of anthropology, was lifted in Russian science in the early 1990s. It allowed researchers to refer more often to the scientific works of certain specialists, but did not create an academic need for constant reference to them.

The situation is somewhat different abroad. There P. N. Tarnovskaya’s results of the research on female criminality were constantly refered to. To confirm this, it is enough to look at the most famous works of world criminology (Adler & Simon, 1979, p. 75; Beirne, 1993, p. 251; Bowker, 1978, p. 51; Mannheim, 2013, p. 748; Reckless, 1967, p. 148; The Origins of Criminology..., 2009, pp. 17, 349; Pollak, 1890, pp. 16, 123; Scarzanella, 1999; The International Library..., 1962). A new stage in the rethinking of criminology began in the early 21^st century, when scientific studies of the late 19^th – early 20^th century, including those by Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya, which were published in French, appeared to be in demand. Our analysis of the most famous foreign works on female criminality has shown that foreign specialists do not turn to the scientific sources of P. N. Tarnovskaya published in Russian, nor to the polemics of her Russian contemporaries on the issues of criminal anthropology and counteraction to female criminality. Correspondence with some of them revealed that these works are difficult to access for foreign specialists and require additional linguistic training. At the same time, translating these works into English requires additional time, intellectual and financial resources.

As the author’s personal experience shows, repeated reading of the same works at different times by the same person, and even better by representatives of new generations, results in rethinking (re-evaluation) of their content based on historical experience. This process occurred in relation to the works by P. N. Tarnovskaya. First, in 2014, her most popular book “Female Killers”, published in 1908 in Paris in French, was republished (Tarnowsky, 2014). The second birth of “Etude Anthropométrique sur les Prostituées et les Voleuses” occurred exactly 125 years after the first edition of this work. In 2017, a London-based publisher Forgotten Books specializing in the restoration of old books, after a technical revision and expert quality assessment, published the work in French in print and in electronic form and offered it for sale (Étude anthropométrique..., 2017). Given the emerging demand for classic works on criminology, in 2018 this work was republished again in print by the same publisher in the Classic Reprint series (Tarnowsky, 2018a) and is still in demand by readers. The same publishing house in the same series published in French the second work of Praskovya Nikolayevna – “Female Killers” (Tarnowsky, 2018b), which attracted even more attention of foreign specialists from various branches of knowledge, and also forced to turn to the work of this author. Judging by the intense citation of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works by foreign authors when conducting their own research (Political Symbolism, 2020, p. 251), we can say that the interest in them is not weakening. Foreign authors not only highly estimated her works, but also created special videos indicating her contribution to modern world criminology. An example of this is a short educational video created and made publicly available on the Internet by an authoritative Indian criminologist, Doctor of Criminology, Professor of Criminology, President of the South Asian Society of Criminology and Victimology (SASCV) Karuppannan Jaishankar, entitled “Pauline Tarnowsky: Mother of Criminology” in the “Key Thinkers in Criminology” series²⁷.

It is noteworthy that the mass reprinting of these works by P. N. Tarnovskaya began a little over 100 years after their first publication and after the death of their author, outside their historical homeland and in foreign languages. Today, the two previously mentioned monographs on criminal anthropology, which brought her international fame as an outstanding Russian criminologist who studied female criminality, are being sold in print and electronically on various trading platforms. In the Russian Federation, some scientific works by P. N. Tarnovskaya were adapted to new conditions and republished in the collection of scientific works “Russian Racial Theory before 1917” (Russian Racial Theory..., 2004). Only two small works by this author were published in this collection: “New Works on Criminal Anthropology”" (Tarnovskaya, 2004a) and “On the Sense Organs of Criminals and Prostitutes” (Tarnovskaya, 2004b). At the same time, the two fundamental scientific works mentioned above – monographs “Female Thieves. An Anthropological Study” and “Female Killers. An Anthropological Study” – have not yet been republished as separate works. We hope that this will not take long – it is just that the time has not yet come in Russian criminological science for a thoughtful reassessment of the pre-revolutionary criminological heritage, including the criminological and anthropological studies of P. N. Tarnovskaya.

In our opinion, the scientific interest in Praskovya Nikolayevna’s works abroad is determined by active scientific historical-criminological studies by foreign authors. The most famous of them at the beginning of the 21^st century was a chapter entitled “Polina Tarnovsky: The Anthropology of Prostitutes and Thieves, 1889” published in English in Nicole Rafter’s book “The Origins of Criminology”, published in London in 2009 (The Origins of Criminology..., 2009). This chapter summarized the main points of the monograph “Anthropometric Studies of Prostitutes and Thieves, 1889” in the English language. It states that P. N. Tarnovskaya was one of the leading European criminal anthropologists, while today she is known mainly due to the frequent references to her by Cesare Lombroso in his book on female criminality. The author of this work cites only two of her monographs, mentioned above, published in Paris in French (Tarnowsky, 2009, pp. 178–182), while P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published in other languages, including Russian, are not mentioned at all.

It is also noteworthy that the methods used by P. N. Tarnovskaya, as well as the results of anthropometric studies of prostitutes and criminals conducted in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries, have been actively used by Brazilian historians from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. These works allowed them to compare anthropological data of criminals and prostitutes with similar studies by other authors and to carry out a new scientific historical and criminological interpretation of female deviancy and criminality (Beatriz do Nascimento Prechet et al., 2015).

In the few recent years, genuine studies of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific work have appeared. Using the latest information technologies, they prove that the works of foreign specialists of the 19^th century show a clearly visible methodological influence of her works on the development of European and world criminal anthropology. They emphasize the change in the views of the criminal anthropology founder Cesare Lombroso and other specialists in the study of female criminality and prostitution, as well as their borrowing of materials and results of Praskovya Nikolayevna’s research. This is evidenced by a series of publications by

Frederick White, an authoritative American specialist and Professor of the Russian language and Integrative Studies at Utah Valley University (White, 2020, 2021). Indeed, our analysis of Cesare Lombroso and Guglielmo Ferrero’s “Female Criminal and Prostitute”, published in Old French in Paris in 1896, contains multiple references to Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s research findings without citing the primary source (Lombroso & Ferrero, 1896). In the monograph, the authors mention the results obtained by P. N. Tarnovskaya 78 times, including when comparing them with their own anthropological measurements and anthropometric data obtained by other researchers.

Frederick White is not the only specialist who turned to the study of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s scientific creativity. Other American researchers have also paid attention to Praskovya Nikolayevna’s scientific legacy. They include Lin Huff-Corzine, Professor of the Sociology Department at the University of Central Florida, and Kayla Toohy, Doctor of Psychology, Associate Professor of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Department at the University of Tampa, who translated her book “Female Killers” from Old French into English. As a result of researching P. N. Tarnovskaya’s work and translating her book, they prepared scientific articles “New Discoveries from the Past: an account of the translation of Dr. Pauline Tarnowsky’s 1908 book, Female Killers” (Huff-Corzine & Toohy, 2019) and “Life and Scholarly Work of Pauline Tarnowsky: Mother of Criminology” (Huff-Corzine & Toohy, 2019). Having analyzed P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works, archival materials from the Cesare Lombroso Museum in Rome, including personal correspondence between C. Lombroso and P. N. Tarnovskaya, and works by other authors published in English, they evaluated Praskovya Nikolayevna’s contribution to the formation and development of world criminal anthropology and criminology. As a result, they unequivocally stated that Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya is “the mother of criminology” (Huff-Corzine & Toohy, 2023). In our opinion, such an assessment of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s contribution to world criminology is subjective and not undisputable, but it may exist. This high assessment is due to a number of circumstances. First, it is habitual for the academic circles to assign unofficial professional statuses to the founders of new scientific areas. For example, some foreign specialists refer to Cesare Lombroso as “the pioneer of criminology” (Wolfgang, 1961) and/or “the father of criminology” (Mazzarello, 2011). Second, creating the “mother of criminology” image is an element of feminism in criminology and a logical reflection of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s greatest contribution to the world criminological science at the time of its formation, among women involved in research activities. At the turn of the 20^th and 21^st centuries, such imaginative thinking in the Soviet-Russian academic criminological circles allowed “attributing” the informal status of the “grandmother of Soviet criminology” to Ninel Fedorovna Kuznetsova, laureate of the USSR State Prize in Science, Honored Researcher of the RSFSR, Doctor of Law, Professor Emeritus of Lomonosov Moscow State University. Third, the rooting of the “mother of criminology” informal status can also be explained by the fact that of all women criminologists of the late 19^th – early 20^th century, only P. N. Tarnovskaya had major scientific works in the field of criminal anthropology, which influenced its development, as well as the origin and formation of anthropological branch in the world female criminology.

As a result of our historical-criminological research, we managed to identify 48 works by P. N. Tarnovskaya, written and published in various languages, among them three major monographs of great theoretical and applied importance for modern criminology (see Appendix, Table P1). In addition, we found, identified, described and evaluated 80 sources published in various languages, characterizing qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the most significant scientific works by P. N. Tarnovskaya (see Appendix, Table P2). We found materials of international and national scientific events where P. N. Tarnovskaya participated and her contribution was indicated. We also found mentions of her scientific work in other documents, including obituaries (see Appendix, Table 3). We have analyzed reference and other information that allows evaluating the contribution of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya to the Russian, European and world criminology.

Conclusions

Our historical-criminological study of the research of women’s criminal behavior carried out by Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya in the late 19^th – early 20^th century allows formulating several conclusions.

First, in the late 19^th – early 20^th century Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya prepared and published a significant number of scientific works on female deviance (prostitution) and crime in several languages, using complex methods of cognition applied in biology, medicine (psychiatry), psychology, sociology, and law. It is difficult to determine the total number of such works within a single study, but, according to our data, there are, at least, 50 of them. The difficulty is due not only to the publications geography, the use of several languages to present the research results, but also to the time interval from their promulgation to the present day; as a result, most of them have been irretrievably lost, and only single copies have survived in various states, which are not always available to modern researchers and mass readers.

Second, the works of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya most significant for Russian, European and world criminological science were published in several languages: Russian, French, Italian, and German. As a result of this linguistic diversity, it is difficult for modern researchers, usually unencumbered with knowledge of several European languages, to objectively assess her contribution to criminological science. Russian specialists assess her contribution only by two major works: “Female Thieves. Anthropological study” and “Female Killers. Anthropological study”. To date, these works are hardly accessible to readers and are bibliographic rarities; as for other works by this author published in foreign languages, most readers are not even aware of their existence. Modern foreign specialists, as a rule, evaluate P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works published in French and Italian without knowing her main works published in Russia. As a result, the conducted historical-criminological research does not fully reflect Praskovya Nikolayevna’s contribution to the Russian, European and world criminological science.

Third, in order to conduct a comprehensive, complete and objective study of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya’s scientific work, it is necessary to create an international research group to identify, register, provide linguocultural adaptation of, disseminate and popularize all her scientific works devoted to the study of personal characteristics of female criminals. A possible option for popularization of P. N. Tarnovskaya’s works could be to translate into English and republish the most valuable monographic works “Female Thieves. Anthropological study” and “Female Killers. Anthropological study”, as well as to translate from Old French into Russian the book “Étude anthropométrique sur les prostituées et les voleuses” and republish it in Russia. Undoubtedly, a collection of scientific articles by P. N. Tarnovskaya, published both in Russia and abroad, must be created but this is an idea for the future. Actually, it may come true in the nearest future. This is facilitated not only by the scientific interest in the work of Praskovya Nikolayevna, but also by the formation of a new branch in the world criminological science, called “historical criminology”.

Fourth, our historical-criminological research does not claim to be comprehensive, indisputable and final. Many important issues from the life of Praskovya Nikolayevna Tarnovskaya remained outside the scope of our study, because they went beyond the topic boundaries, although they represent a historical value. We have limited ourselves to just one aspect of her multifaceted and fruitful life; the issues related to her research in the field of psychiatry and her intense public activities were outside our study. We believe that the research we have conducted is only the grounds and reasons or productive food for reflection on the history of Russian criminological science and reassessment of views on it.

APPENDIX