Abstract
The lawyer Evaristo de Moraes and the physician Nina Rodrigues both investigated the criminal behavior of Marcelino Bispo, the perpetrator of an attack against President Prudente de Moraes on November 5, 1897, both highlighting the same issue: criminal responsibility. Speaking out in favor of the precepts of criminal anthropology, they shared the conviction that Bispo’s criminal responsibility should be attenuated in virtue of his suggestible nature. Despite the similarities, could the specific ways they each used the contributions of criminology give us the chance to identify different forms of appropriation of a single intellectual framework? The aim of this study therefore consists of analyzing where the arguments in their respective analyses converged and diverged.
criminal anthropology; First Republic; racialism; Evaristo de Moraes (1871-1939; Nina Rodrigues (1862-1906