Various schools of thought have emerged to explain the causes of crime.

Early
schools, which arose before the 18th century, attributed crime to factors like the
influence of evil spirits or demons, and classical will. However, these schools had their
limitations and lacked a solid scientific basis.

In the 19th century, with the advancement of science and behavioral sciences, there
was a shift towards empirical methods and critical thinking. This led to the
emergence of the Positive School of criminology. This school, unlike the Classical
school, didn’t focus on the offender’s free will but rather on their personality. It used
scientific techniques to study crime and criminals, focusing on the factors that
compel offenders to commit crimes.

Exponents are Cesare Lombroso, William Sheldon and Enrico Ferri.

Cesare Lombroso
Cesare Lombroso, known as the Father of Modern Criminology, was an Italian
criminologist and a doctor specializing in psychiatry. He worked with mentally
afflicted soldiers in the military. Lombroso was the first to use scientific methods to
understand criminal behavior. He studied the physical characteristics of his patients
and criminals, finding that criminals were physically less developed and tended to
commit inferior acts. He also found that criminals were less sensitive to pain, leading
to a lack of empathy for others’ suffering. There is a definite criminal type identifiable
by the person’s physical features.

He Gave a classification of offenders or criminals as follows

(i) Hereditary criminals or Atavists

(ii) Insane Criminals
(iii) Criminaloids

Cesare Lombroso, often considered the father of modern criminology,

categorized criminals into three types:

(i) Hereditary Criminals or Atavists: Lombroso believed these individuals were

a distinct type who couldn’t refrain from committing crimes. He thought they
were “incorrigible” and couldn’t be reformed. He associated certain physical
characteristics with this group, considering them throwbacks to an earlier
stage of human evolution. Examples of these characteristics included an
asymmetric face, a large jaw, excessively long arms, and epilepsy.
(ii) Insane Criminals: Lombroso suggested that these individuals turned to crime
due to certain mental disorders.
(iii) Criminaloids: These individuals, according to Lombroso, were physically
similar to criminals and committed crimes to overcome their inferiority and
survive.

criticism
1. However, Lombroso’s theories, particularly his concept of atavism, have been
widely criticized. Critics argue that he didn’t interpret his findings correctly and
didn’t examine them critically. Today, it’s generally agreed that his findings
were inaccurate and don’t support his theory of atavism. As a result,
Lombroso’s ideas about atavism have been abandoned, and he is considered
a controversial figure in the history of criminology.
2. French criminologist and social psychologist Gabriel de Tarde criticized
Lombroso’s theory of criminal behavior, which was based on physical
measurements. Tarde argued that criminal behavior is learned, not determined
by physical appearance. He also rejected the idea of phrenologists who tried
to link skull and brain characteristics with social behavior.
3. By the time Lombroso passed away in 1909, it was clear that his theories
oversimplified facts and were naive. The idea that criminals are physically
different (atavistic) lost credibility, and modern criminology developed its own
views with little room for Lombroso’s atavism. Some modern writers even refer
to it as the ‘Lombrosian myth’ in criminology. Critics like Lindesmith and Levin
argued that Lombroso’s flawed assumptions hindered the growth of scientific
criminology for decades.
4. Prof. Sutherland criticized Lombroso for shifting the focus from crime as a
social phenomenon to crime as an individual phenomenon, delaying progress
in the field for fifty years without making a lasting contribution.
5. However, Lombroso’s contribution to criminology remains significant. As
Donald Taft noted, Lombroso’s work is important for its influence on
criminology and penal practice, its scientific methodology, and his rejection of
the free-will theory.

William Sheldon

William Sheldon was an American psychologist who introduced the Somatotype

theory in 1940, which falls under biological theories. He tried to explain and predict
crime based on a person’s body type, asserting that a person’s physical structure was
directly related to their temperament and behaviour.

Sheldon’s Body Types Classification was as follows:

(i) Endomorphs: These individuals have a soft, round, and fat body with
smooth skin. They are extroverted, love comfort, and are friendly and
sociable.
 (ii) Mesomorphs: These individuals are muscular, athletic, active, and
dynamic. They have strong and assertive personalities with a tendency to
be aggressive and explosive.
(iii) Ectomorphs: These individuals have a thin, weak, and frail body. They are
introverted, shy, cold, unsociable, sensitive by temperament, and tend to
avoid crowds.
Enrico Ferri

He was the next exponent of the Positive School. He criticized Lombroso’s view of
criminality. According to him mere biological reasons not enough to account for
criminality. He believed that other factors such as emotional reaction, social infirmity
or geographical conditions play a vital role in determining criminal tendencies in
men. He is Known as founder of Criminal Sociology. His Contribution is known as the
Law of Criminal Saturation. According to him, crime is a synthetic product of 3 main
factors :

Those factors were (i) physical or geographical (ii)anthropological (iii) Psychological

or social.

Ferri’s 5 fold classification of criminals

1. Insane criminals : these are criminals who commit crimes due to congenital
reasons
2. Born criminals- Such criminals carry from birth reduced resistance to criminal
stimuli
3. Occasional criminals: he is the product of family and social milieu
4. Passionate criminals: These are otherwise fit but commit crimes due to
impulse, anger or jealousy and feel repentant subsequently.
5. Habitual criminals: these criminals though showing atavistic tendencies also
are influenced by physical and social environment

Conclusion

The Positive School adopted scientific methods in the study of [Link] directed the
attention of criminologists towards the personality of the criminal rather than his
act/[Link] efforts showed that criminals were to be treated rather than
punished. The principle of Individualization in punishment came to be applied in
modern penology.