Skip Navigation


British Journal of Criminology Advance Access originally published online on May 3, 2005
British Journal of Criminology 2006 46(1):78-96; doi:10.1093/bjc/azi043
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
46/1/78    most recent
azi043v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zedner, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Criminology 46:78-96 (2006)
© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (ISTD). All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Policing Before and After the Police

The Historical Antecedents of Contemporary Crime Control

Lucia Zedner*

* Corpus Christi College, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 4JF, UK; email: lucia.zedner{at}law.ox.ac.uk.

The extent and import of changes in contemporary crime control are hotly contested. By setting these changes in historical perspective, this article challenges claims that we are entering a new era in policing. Examining the eighteenth-century antecedents of present developments reveals the explanatory value of historical perspective and the relevance of Enlightenment political theory for the present governance of policing. Teasing out enduring motifs in crime control suggests that the symbolic monopoly on policing asserted by the modern criminal justice state may just be a historical blip in a longer-term pattern of multiple policing providers and markets in security. Loss of this monopoly only intensifies state responsibility to uphold policing as a public good.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PolicingHome page
S. Gilmour
Mazerolle, L. and Ransley, J. (2006). THIRD PARTY POLICING
Policing, October 26, 2009; (2009) pap037v1.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal JusticeHome page
J. Ayling and C. Shearing
Taking care of business: Public police as commercial security vendors
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, February 1, 2008; 8(1): 27 - 50.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 PolicingHome page
S. Gilmour
Understanding Organized Crime: A Local Perspective
Policing, January 1, 2008; 2(1): 18 - 27.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Theoretical CriminologyHome page
L. Zedner
Pre-crime and post-criminology?
Theoretical Criminology, May 1, 2007; 11(2): 261 - 281.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Punishment SocietyHome page
E. O'Sullivan and I. O'Donnell
Coercive confinement in the Republic of Ireland: The waning of a culture of control
Punishment Society, January 1, 2007; 9(1): 27 - 48.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal JusticeHome page
L. Zedner
Liquid security: Managing the market for crime control
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, August 1, 2006; 6(3): 267 - 288.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.