1. Krementsov, Nikolai, Revolutionary Experiments: The Quest for Immortality in Bolshevik Science and Fiction (Oxford, 2014), 6Google Scholar; and Rossiianov, Kirill, “Beyond Species: Il'ya Ivanov and His Experiments on Cross-Breeding Humans with Anthropoid Apes,” Science in Context 15, no. 2 (June 2002): 280 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Gernet, M., “Pervaia russkaia laboratoriia po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” Pravo i zhizn' no. 2 (1924), 30 Google Scholar; and M. Gernet, Rossiiskaia gosudarstvennaia biblioteka (RGB), otdel rukopisei, fond (f.) 603 k. 2, delo (d.) 2, list (ll.) 50ob-51 (Istoricheskii ocherk izucheniia v Rossii prestupnosti).

3. Brückweh, Kerstin, Schumann, Dirk, Wetzell, Richard F., and Ziemann, Benjamin, eds., Engineering Society: The Role of the Human and Social Sciences in Modern Societies, 1880–1980 (Basingstoke, 2012), 11–12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. Gernet, “Pervaia,” 30.

5. Wetzell, Richard F., “Introduction,” in Wetzell, Richard F., ed., Crime and Criminal Justice in Modern Germany (Oxford, 2014), 1–28 Google Scholar. My thanks to Dr. Wetzell for sharing his introduction before its publication.

6. Finkel, Stuart, On the Ideological Front: The Russian Intelligentsia and the Making of the Soviet Public Sphere (New Haven, 2007)Google Scholar; Beer, Daniel, Renovating Russia: The Human Sciences and the Fate of Liberal Modernity, 1880–1930 (Ithaca, 2008)Google Scholar; Pinnow, Kenneth M., Lost to the Collective: Suicide and the Promise of Soviet Socialism (Ithaca, 2010)Google Scholar; Krementsov, Nikolai, A Martian Stranded on Earth: Alexander Bogdanov, Blood Transfusions, and Proletarian Science (Chicago, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Bernstein, Frances Lee, The Dictatorship of Sex: Lifestyle Advice for the Soviet Masses (DeKalb, 2007)Google Scholar.

7. Klein, Julie Thompson, Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory & Practice (Detroit, 1990), 24Google Scholar; and Landau, Martin, Proshansky, Harold and Ittelson, William H., “The Interdisciplinary Approach and the Concept of Behavioral Science,” in Washburne, Norman F., ed., Decisions, Values and Groups: Proceedings of a Conference held at the University of New Mexico (New York, 1962), 12 Google Scholar.

8. Shelley, Louise, “Soviet Criminology: Its Birth and Demise, 1917–1936,” Slavic Review 38, no. 4 (Winter 1979): 614–28Google Scholar; Shelley, Louise, “Soviet Criminology after the Revolution,” The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 70, no. 3 (Fall 1979): 391–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Kowalsky, Sharon A., Deviant Women: Female Crime and Criminology in Revolutionary Russia, 1880–1930 (DeKalb, 2009)Google Scholar.

9. I understand multidisciplinary projects as part of an interdisciplinary continuum. They are additive rather than integrative, meaning that although there might be spillage between the different disciplines the latter are fundamentally unchanged. In a multidisciplinary project the existing division of labor remains intact even while the disciplines expand or alter their range and degree of activity by looking at questions from different perspectives or adopting practices from another field. By contrast, interdisciplinary projects result in integration and blending. They tend to be proactive and intentional with the goal of formulating new questions or approaches. As a consequence, the disciplines involved in an interdisciplinary project are restructured and go beyond building bridges between each other. See Julie Thompson Klein, Interdisciplinarity; and Klein, Julie Thompson, “A Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity,” in Frodeman, Robert, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (New York, 2010), 15–30 Google Scholar.

10. The “competing impulses” of interdisciplinarity are discussed in Moran, Joe, Interdisciplinarity (London, 2002), 15Google Scholar.

11. Krementsov, Revolutionary; and Naiman, Eric, Sex in Public: The Incarnation of Early Soviet Ideology (Princeton, 1997)Google Scholar.

12. See Lutz Raphael, “Embedding the Human and Social Sciences in Western Societies, 1880–1980: Reflections on Trends and Methods of Current Research,” in Brückweh, Schumann, Wetzell, and Ziemann, eds., Engineering Society, 51–52; and Cohen, Sol, “The Mental Hygiene Movement, the Development of Personality and the School: The Medicalization of American Education,” History of Education Quarterly 23, no. 2 (Spring 1983), 127–28Google Scholar.

13. Rosenbaum, Betty B., “Relationship between War and Crime in the United States,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 30, no. 5 (January/February 1940), 729–38Google Scholar; Wetzell, Richard F., Inventing the Criminal: A History of German Criminology, 1880–1945 (Chapel Hill, 2000), 107–15Google Scholar; and Shelley, “Soviet Criminology after the Revolution,” 393–94.

14. Wetzell, “Introduction,” 1–28.

15. Marques, Tiago Pires, Crime and the Fascist State, 1850–1940 (London, 2013), 48Google Scholar; and Jan Simon Van Der Aa, ed., Proceedings of the IXth International Penitentiary Congress held in London August 1925 (Bern, 1927), 110–24. Mikhail Gernet cited the Congress’s decision as a justification for creating the State Institute. M. Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti v Moskve,” Pravo i zhizn' no. 2 (1927): 43.

16. Izuchenie lichnosti prestupnika v SSSR i za granitsei (Moscow, 1925)Google Scholar; Rafter, Nicole Hahn, “Psychopathy and the Evolution of Criminological Knowledge,” Theoretical Criminology 1, no. 2 (May 1997): 243–44Google Scholar; Vervaeck, Louis, “Evolution in the Treatment of Belgian Delinquents and Mentally-Ill,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 24, no. 1 (May/June 1933): 203–4Google Scholar; Salvatore, Ricardo D., “Positivist Criminology and State Formation in Modern Argentina, 1890–1940,” in Becker, Peter and Wetzell, Richard F., eds., Criminals and Their Scientists: The History of Criminology in International Perspective (Cambridge, Eng., 2006), 253–79Google Scholar; and Wetzell, Inventing, 126–37.

17. Salvatore, “Positivist,” 279.

18. Kotsonis, Yanni, States of Obligation: Taxes and Citizenship in the Russian Empire and Early Soviet Republic (Toronto, 2014), 300–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. Pinnow; and Kharkhordin, Oleg, The Collective and the Individual in Russia: A Study of Practices (Berkeley, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Kowalsky, Deviant, Chapter 2; Krementsov, Martian, 7–8.

21. Kojevnikov, Alexei, “The Great War, the Russian Civil War, and the Invention of Big Science,” Science in Context 15, no. 2 (June 2002): 239–75Google Scholar.

22. Mogil'ner, Marina, Homo Imperii: A History of Physical Anthropology in Russia (Lincoln, 2013), 357Google Scholar; and Solomon, Susan Gross, “Social Hygiene and Soviet Public Health, 1921–1930,” in Solomon, Susan Gross and Hutchinson, John F., eds., Health and Society in Revolutionary Russia (Bloomington, 1990), 175Google Scholar.

23. K. N. Shapshev, “Podgotovka sovremennogo vracha v VUZ'e,” Vestnik sovremmenoi meditsiny no. 18 (1929), 962–63. Shapshev was arguing for a synthesis of the social, biological, and medical sciences.

24. Ivanov, L. O. and I'lina, L. V., Puti i sud'by otechestvennoi kriminologii (Moscow, 1991), 128–32Google Scholar; O. D., “Novoe uchrezhdenie,” Rabochii sud, no. 9–10 (1925): 411–14; and O.D., “Otkrytye Kriminologicheskogo Kabineta pri Leningradskom gubsude,” Rabochii sud, no. 17–18 (1925): 785–86.

25. “Izuchenie lichnosti prestupnika i prestupnosti. Istoriia vozniknoveniia kabineta po izucheniiu lichnosti prestupnika i prestupnosti,” Ezhenedel'nik moszdravotdela, no. 30–31 (July 28-August 4, 1924): 605–610; and Gernet, “Pervaia,” 26–34.

26. Kowalsky, Deviant, 64–73.

27. The affiliated branches, including those in Moscow, Saratov, and Leningrad, were distinct from the criminological institutions established by local authorities.

28. M. Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” Administrativnyi vestnik, no. 11 (1925): 31.

29. M. N. Gernet, “Pervye za granitsei i pervaia v SSSR laboratorii po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” in Izuchenie, 18–19; and Ivanov and I'lina, 147–48.

30. Marques, esp. Chapter 2; and Nye, Robert A., “Heredity or Milieu: The Foundations of Modern European Criminological Theory,” Isis 67, no. 3 (September 1976): 334–55Google Scholar.

31. Wetzell, Inventing, 15–17, 126–27; and Wolfgang, Marvin E., “Criminology and the Criminologist,” The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 54, no. 2 (June 1963): 155–62Google Scholar. The longer history of criminology in the USSR is explored in Solomon, Peter H. Jr., “Soviet Criminology: Its Demise and Rebirth, 1928–1963,” Soviet Union 1, no. 2 (1974): 122–40Google Scholar.

32. V. A. Vnukov, “Iz praktiki sudebno-psikhiatricheskikh ekspertiz,” Prestupnik i prestupnost', no. 2 (1927): 253–63; and Joravsky, David, Russian Psychology: A Critical History (Oxford, 1989), 274Google Scholar.

33. The Faculty of Soviet Law contained a criminological sub-commission that coordinated learning activities with the Moscow Bureau and offered a series of related coursework, such as Iurii Bekhterev’s class on the fundamentals of prison education. An article on prison tattoos also references a criminological bureau (kabinet) at the University. These activities were subsumed within the framework of teaching Soviet and/or criminal law and did not constitute stand-alone curricula. TsGA g. Moskvy, f. 1609, op. 7, d. 155, ll. 11–11ob (Protokol No. 2. Zasedaniia Kriminologicheskoi Podkomissii kafedry Ugolovnogo Prava F.S.P. I M.G.U. ot 19 noiabria 1927 goda); Tsentral'nyi gosudarstvennyi arkhiv goroda Moskvy (TsGA g. Moskvy) f. 1609, op. 7, d. 182, ll. 42–43 (Osnovy penitentsiarnoi pedagogiki); and M. Avdeeva, “Tatuirovka v mestakh zakliucheniia,” Pravo i zhizn' no. 1 (1927): 67.

34. Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Rossiiskoi federatsii (GARF), f. 4042, op. 10, d. 7, l. 108 (Plan raboty gosudarstvennogo instituta po izucheniiu prestupnosti i prestupnika). The plan went on to state, “This collectivism is expressed not only in the collective process of creative work and investigations, but also in the form of the collective criticism of the work of the Institute’s individual members.” Emphasis in the original.

35. Ivanov and I'lina, 191–92.

36. RGB, otdel rukopisei, f. 603 k. 2, d.  2 l. 48ob (Istoricheskii ocherk).

37. Bekhterev, V. M., Zadachi psikho-nevrologicheskogo instituta (St. Petersburg, 1908), 3, 6Google Scholar; and Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” 35. Richard Wetzell, Inventing, 174. Wetzell’s study of German criminology highlights the growing complexity of criminological theories, with the overlapping of genetics, environment, and psychology. In addition, Martin J. Wiener talks of prisoners becoming more “opaque” with the rise of criminology, see: Reconstructing the Criminal: Culture, Law, and Policy in England, 1830–1914 (Cambridge, Eng., 1990), 228. My thanks to Jamie Phillips for sharing his sources and thoughts on Bekhterev’s vision of total knowledge.

38. Landau, Proshansky, and Ittelson, 11–12; and Park, Hyung Wook, “Edmund Vincent Cowdry and the Making of Gerontology as a Multidisciplinary Scientific Field in the United States,” Journal of the History of Biology 41, no. 3 (Fall 2008): 529–72Google Scholar.

39. The instrumentalism of interdisciplinary collaborations in the social sciences is stressed in Landau, Proshansky, and Ittelson, 13–14.

40. B. S. U., “Dva goda raboty Gosudarstevennogo Instituta po izucheniiu prestupnosti i prestupnika,” Administrativnyi vestnik, no. 10–11 (1927): 92–93.

41. Shelley, “Soviet Criminology after the Revolution,” 391.

42. “Plan raboty,” 107–9; Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti v Moskve,” 43–44; and Ivanov and I'lina, 179–80. Ivanov and I'lina see the structure as reflecting the dominant influence of the sociological school of criminal law.

43. GARF, f. 4042, op. 10, d. 7, l. 105–05ob (Protokol No. 3 zasedaniia soveta i-ta po izucheniiu prestupnosti i prestupnika pri N.K.V.D. ot 24-go sent. 1925 g.).

44. E. Shirvindt, “O problemakh prestupnosti,” Problemy prestupnosti no. 1 (1926): 9–10. Many of the participants, most notably Gernet, belonged to the left-wing sociological school of criminology. Kowalsky, Deviant, 37–40; and Utevskii, B. S., Vospominaniia iurista (Moscow, 1989), 275Google Scholar.

45. RGB, otdel rukopisei, f. 603, k. 3, d. 17, l. 7 (Predlozheniia po dokladu M. N. Gerneta). Another, slightly stronger version of the same response called for recognizing the “decisive significance” of economic and social factors. See, ibid., l. 8.

46. Doel, Ronald E., Solar System Astronomy in America: Communities, Patronage, and Interdisciplinary Science, 1920–1960 (Cambridge, Eng., 1996), xiiGoogle Scholar; Crowther-Heyck, Hunter, “Patrons of the Revolution: Ideals and Institutions in Postwar Behavioral Science,” Isis 97, no. 3 (September 2006): 422Google Scholar; and Landau, Proshansky, and Ittelson, 16.

47. GARF, f. 4042, op. 10, d. 7, l. 12 (Letter of February 27, 1925). The Commissariat pushed for the new entity to be housed under the Institute of Law in the Faculty of Social Sciences (FON).

48. “Izuchenie prestupnosti i prestupnika (Plenum Gos. instituta po izucheniiu prestupnosti),” RGB, otdel rukopisei, f. 603, k. 3, d. 18, l. 14; and Ivanov and I'lina, 190–91.

49. Wetzell, “Introduction,” 5–11.

50. Solomon, Peter H. Jr., “Soviet Penal Policy, 1917–1934: A Reinterpretation,” Slavic Review 39, no. 2 (June 1980): 195–217 Google Scholar.

51. Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti v Moskve,” 42–43.

52. Shirvindt, “O problemakh prestupnosti,” 7, 10. Other proposed criminological centers in the USSR similarly emphasized the fusion of theoretical and practical work. See, for example,  GARF, f. 4042, op. 10, d. 7, l. 80 (Letter of July 9, 1926 from the Central Executive Committee of the Tartar SSR to Soviet of People’s Commissars RSFSR).

53. B. S. U., “Dva goda raboty,” 92.

54. GARF, f. 4042, op. 10, d. 7, ll. 105–05ob (Protokol No. 3). Mikhail Gernet suggested that the Moscow Bureau for the Study of the Criminal Personality and Crime benefitted from the absence of any guiding statute or dominant school of thought. This allowed its members to find their own way and learn from experience. It also gave the Bureau the freedom to involve a wide variety of actors. “Pervaia,” 31.

55. Shirvindt, “O problemakh prestupnosti,” 12.

56. RGB, otdel rukopisei, f. 603, k. 3, d. 21, ll. 19–20 (Tezisy po teme ‘Izuchenie prestupnosti i prestupnika’). Liublinskii’s program emphasized specializations like medicine, education, and psychology, but a handwritten comment on the document suggested that it also should encompass “the rich experience of penitentiary workers.”

57. Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” 33.

58. Gernet, “Gosudarstvennyi institut po izucheniiu prestupnosti,” 35; N. N. Spasokukotskii, “Deiatel'nost' Gosudarstvennogo instituta po izucheniiu prestupnosti and prestupnika,” Problemy prestupnosti no. 2 (1927): 233; and N. N. Spasokukotskii, “Deiatel'nost' Gosudarstvennogo Instituta po izucheniiu prestupnosti and prestupnika pri NKVD,” Problemy prestupnosti no. 4 (1929): 136–37.

59. Personal correspondence with Richard Wetzell, August 21, 2014; Salvatore, Ricardo D., “Criminology, Prison Reform, and the Buenos Aires Working Class,” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 23, no. 2 (Fall 1992): 286–89Google Scholar; Oliver Liang, “The Biology of Morality: Criminal Biology in Bavaria, 1924–1933,” in Criminals, 425–46; and Wetzell, Inventing, 126–37.

60. The leadership of the State Institute was aware of this trend and its political implications. See the response to charges that the flagship periodical was a “parliament of opinions” that lacked “a single face.” E. Shirvindt, “Ot redaktsii,” Problemy prestupnosti no. 4 (1929), no page number.

61. Richard F. Wetzell, “Criminology in Weimar and Nazi Germany,” in Criminals, 401–4; and Cohen, 130.

62. Ivanov and Il'ina, 109–13.

63. Tsentral'nii derzhavnii arkhiv vishchikh organiv vladi ta upravlinnia Ukraini (TsDAVO), f. 5, op. 3, d. 484, l. 3 (E. Frenkel', “Osnovnye metody provedeniia issledovaniia pravonarushitelia”).

64. Definitions of “personality” from the era can be found in Sapir, Edward, “Personality,” in Johnson, Alvin and Seligman, R.A., eds., Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York, 1934), 12: 85–87Google Scholar.

65. Distinctive here was the openness to a mix of causal factors. By contrast, researchers in Germany did not deny the importance of the social environment in producing crime and criminals, but theories of heredity dominated in the 1920s and 1930s. See Wetzell, Inventing.

66. “Izuchenie lichnosti prestupnika i prestupnosti,” 608–10; and V.O. Akkerman, “Kriminologicheskaia klinika,” Prestupnik i prestupnost' no. 2 (1927): 211–17.

67. Ivanov and I'lina, 183–84.

68. TsDAVO, f. 5, op. 3, d. 484, l. 2 (Polozhenie o iacheikakh po izucheniiu lichnosti pravonarushitelia pri ITU USSR); and ibid., ll. 54–55 (Instruktsiia iacheikam po izucheniiu prestupnika pri ITU USSR).

69. B. Khatuntsev, “O sotsial'no-psikhologicheskom issledovanii lichnosti obviniaemogo na predvaritel'nom sledstvii i na sude,” Pravo i sud, no. 2 (1924): 51; Akkerman, 211; and D. O., “Otkrytye,” 786.

70. O. D., “Novoe,” 413–14. The Criminological Clinic’s seminars included psychiatric studies of live prisoners and an introduction to the reflex theories of Ivan Pavlov and Vladimir Bekhterev. I. Liubarskii, “Nasha dal'neishaia rabota (V Kriminilogicheskom Kabinete Leningradskogo Gubsuda),” Rabochii sud no. 41–42 (1925): 1595–98.

71. Gernet, “Pervaia,” 29.

72. Star, Susan Leigh and Griesemer, James R., “Institutional Ecology: ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39,” Social Studies of Science 19, no. 3 (August 1989): 393CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Collins, Harry, Evans, Robert, and Gorman, Michael E., “Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise,” in Gorman, Michael E., ed., Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise: Creating New Kinds of Collaboration (Cambridge, Mass., 2010), 12Google Scholar.

73. In a 1926 survey of the Moscow Criminological Clinic, the author stated that the questionnaire enabled statistical work that explored correlations among social, biological, and other factors. A. M. Rapoport, “K praktike izucheniia lichnosti prestupnika,” Prestupnik i prestupnost' no. 1 (1926): 36.

74. Gernet, “Pervaia,” 29.

75. TsDAVO, f. 5, op. 3, d. 484, l. 54 (Instruktsiia iacheikam).

76. Iu. Iu. Bekhterev, Izuchenie lichnosti zakliuchennogo (istoriia, zadachi, metodika i tekhnika) (Moscow, 1928), 3–7. Bekhterev believed that prison workers and educators were capable of gathering information about the inmates’ personality without special instruments and scientific knowledge. The purpose of his pamphlet was to frame their observations and give them a sense of what to look for and record in the “individual forms” about inmates.

77. It is doubtful that Khatuntsev’s proposal went very far. The editors of the journal stated that they disagreed with many of his ideas, but published the article because it raised some interesting questions. Khatuntsev, 51–56.

78. Khatuntsev, 54–55.

79. A. A. Gertsenzon, “K metodike individual'no-sotsiologicheskogo izucheniia pravonarushitelei,” Prestupnik i prestupnost', no. 2 (Moscow, 1927): 152–64. Emphasis in the original.

80. Gertsenzon, 161.

81. Gernet, “Pervye,” 16; TsGA g. Moskvy f. 1609, op. 6, d. 102, l. 27 (Programma seminariia prof. M. N. Gerneta po ugolovnomu pravu (na tret'em kursu)); and Pinnow, 108.

82. Here I am obviously adapting Stephen Kotkin’s well-known formulation about “speaking Bolshevik.”

83. V. V. Brailovskii, for example, defined the criminologist as someone who applied the sociological method, as opposed to the biologist, who employed natural scientific methods. V. V. Brailovskii, “O biologicheskikh korniakh prestupnosti,” Sbornik po psikhonevrologii (Rostov-on-Don, 1928), 545.

84. Collins, Evans, and Gorman, 12–13.

85. TsGA g. Moskvy f. 1609, op. 6, d. 102, l. 27 (Programma); TsGA g. Moskvy, f. 1609, op. 7, d. 155, ll. 11–11ob (Protokol No. 2); and TsGA g. Moskvy f. 1609, op. 7, d. 182,l. 42 (Osnovy).

86. Rapoport, 34–35. Rapoport also argued that doctors were more trusted by prisoners and thus their leading role helped to improve the quality of information that was gathered.

87. Utevskii, 232.

88. Bekhterev, Izuchenie, 12.

89. Graham, Loren R., Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: A Short History (Cambridge, Eng., 1993), 178–79Google Scholar.

90. According to one study of scientific collaboration, people choose collaboration when it “is viewed as the best or perhaps the only way of achieving one’s objectives.” Shrum, Wesley, Genuth, Joel, and Chompalov, Ivan, Structures of Scientific Collaboration (Cambridge, Mass., 2007), 20Google Scholar.

91. “Big science” involved the move from small- to large-scale scientific activities in the early 20^th-century. See Krementsov, Martian, 6–7; and Krementsov, Revolutionary, 98–100.

92. Krementsov, Nikolai, “Hormones and the Bolsheviks: From Organotherapy to Experimental Endocrinology, 1918–1929,” Isis 99, no. 3 (September 2008): 513–18Google Scholar.

93. Kowalsky, Deviant, 54; and Solomon, Susan Gross, “The Limits of Government Patronage of Sciences: Social Hygiene and the Soviet State, 1920–1930,” Social History of Medicine 3, no. 3 (December 1990): 405–35Google Scholar. Dependence on funding agencies and individuals also made collaborative projects in the United States unstable. See Crowther-Heyck, 445.

94. For example, Gernet’s former pupils were scattered throughout the government, and he made use of these connections to construct the experiential component of his criminal law seminar. TsGA g. Moskvy f. 1609, op. 6, d. 102, l. 28 (Programma).

95. In addition to his work at the State Institute, Gernet also led the Department of Moral Statistics in the Central Statistical Administration, taught in the law faculty at Moscow University, headed the university’s criminological museum, and participated in the founding of the Moscow Bureau.

96. Mogil'ner, 351–58. Viktor Valerianovich Bunak, for example, participated in the Moscow Bureau. See E. Kh. Krasnushkin, “Kabinet po izucheniiu lichnosti prestupnika i prestupnosti,” in Izuchenie, 32.

97. Beer, 167, 182.

98. Klein, “A Taxonomy,” 18.

99. Shrum, Genuth, and Chompalov, esp. Chapter 1.

100. “Disput k voprosu ob izuchenii prestupnosti v SSSR,” Revoliutsiia prava no. 3 (1929): 47–78; Shelley, “Soviet Criminology,” 624–26; and Shelley, , “The 1929 Dispute on Soviet Criminology,” Soviet Union 6, no. 2 (1979): 175–85Google Scholar.

101. A. G. “Nervus vagus prestupnosti,” Revoliutsiia prava no. 6 (1929): 169–72. Brailovskii was a psycho-neurologist and directed the North-Caucasus Scientific Bureau for the Study of Crime.

102. Kowalsky, Deviant, 74–75. Many of the leading figures of early Soviet criminology survived the upheavals of the 1930s and remained active until their deaths by natural causes. Mikhail Gernet, who went fully blind, retreated to the relative safety of the past, devoting his last years to writing a monumental history of the Tsarist prisons that won a Stalin prize in 1947. This is similar to the story told by Mark Adams in regard to the fate of eugenics at the end of the 1920s. See “Eugenics in Russia, 1900–1940,” in Adams, Mark B., ed., The Wellborn Science: Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil, and Russia (Oxford, 1990), 185–92Google Scholar.

103. The State Institute went through multiple reorganizations during the 1930s. It was renamed the State Institute of Criminal Policy in 1931 with additional changes and titles to follow. Its bio-psychological and forensic sections were closed, as were the local and regional criminological laboratories. See Solomon, “Soviet Criminology,” 128–31; and Shelley, “Soviet Criminology,” 625–27.

104. Scholars of interdisciplinary collaboration emphasize that an extensive time period is needed for true integration to take place and for new interdisciplinary fields to coalesce. See, for example, Collins, Evans, and Gorman, 20–21.

105. Solomon, “Soviet Criminology”; and Dowling, Rhiannon, “Explaining and Preventing Crime in the Soviet 1970s: The Institute of Criminology and Problems in the (American) War on Crime,” Berkeley Program in East European and Eurasian Studies Working Paper Series (Summer 2013)Google Scholar, at www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5wx290g3 (last accessed January 9, 2016).