The Moetal Remains of Swedenborg 59 



cially Keafft's portrait seems to indicate a forehead profile Avhicli is 

 continued without interruption into tlie ridge of the nose, that is, the 

 portrait indicates a Greek profile. 



Regarding this departure it should, however, in the first place, 

 be mentioned, that in en face pictures, neither the degree of sloping, 

 and the vaulting of the forehead, nor the depression between the fore- 

 head and the nose, or, on the whole, the rehef conditions of the profile, 

 come to a plain and correct expression, at least if the lights are not 

 especially suitable for this purpose, and also that the position of the edge 

 of the hair, and even the hair-dressing itself, greatly influence our 

 conception of the dimensions of a forehead. I shall soon have the 

 opportunity of showing a striking example of the influence of these 

 factors. Furthermore, it seems by no means improbable that the »Olym- 

 pic» arching of the forehead, which is especially manifest in the copy 

 of Beandee's portrait kept in the Royal Academy of Sciences, with or 

 without purpose has been sharply accentuated to indicate the sublime 

 thinker and seer Swedenboect. Evident exaggerations, just in this 

 direction, we find in certain likenesses of Swedenboect of later periods 

 (for instance in Peeston Powees' well known bust). Regarding the 

 Greek profile in Keafft's portrait, even this could be a kind of »Ucentia 

 poctka». According to the esthetic conceptions of former times, the 

 Greek nose was supposed to give the impression of »freedom from 

 the passions», of »equilibrium between intelligence and sensuality», 

 traits of character which an artist might well desire to introduce into 

 his likeness ^of Swedenboeg. 



What I have said may possibly be regarded as an illegitimate 

 attempt to explain away the contradictory arguments in the demon- 

 stration. To protect myself from a charge of this kind, I need only 

 call to mind the fact that the portraits can in no wise be regarded as 

 accordant witnesses, but that, on the contrary, the last-mentioned phy- 

 siognomical features on respectively Beandee's and Keafft's portraits 

 are much less or not at all pronounced on several of the other por- 

 traits. These discrepancies of course greatly reduce the value of the 

 testimony furnished by each individual portrait, in respect to details, 

 and I therefore do not hesitate to say that in general the portraits 

 and the cranium agree fairly well with each other. 



This conclusion, however, rests chiefly upon a quite subjective 

 valuation of similarities and differences and it was therefore desir- 

 able to subject the question to more objective proofs, which was done 



