Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the legal history of domicilio coatto (forced residence), a system of summary police-administered deportation instituted by Italy’s Liberal government soon after national unification in 1861. Introduced in an emergency law in 1863, its limited purpose was to suppress a public-order crisis in the south. Within just eight years, however, forced residence had become a regular institution of Italian criminal justice. Not only did it remain as such until Mussolini’s seizure of power in 1922, but it also provided an important blueprint for confino di polizia, the Fascist variant of forced residence implemented in 1926. Focusing on the complex circumstances in which domicilio coatto emerged, the causes of its rapid transformation into a routine weapon of preventative policing, and the legal ideologies of its proponents, this article aims to explain why Italian legal experts crafted the highly repressive instrument and championed it as an essential, if not desirable, institution of ‘liberal’ criminal justice in the young constitutional monarchy. It argues that domicilio coatto was devised to be not simply an expedient for punishing political opponents, as scholars have long emphasized, but a regular instrument for thwarting what jurists and lawmakers considered to be the principal long-term threat to cementing Liberal rule: common crime. Such an interpretation sheds new light on the origins, objectives and historical significance of forced residence in Liberal Italy; at the same time, it offers a critical complement to the existing scholarship that has focused almost exclusively on the political uses of domicilio coatto.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".