328 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon 



thus twelve figures for coordinates and seven for types and we can com- 

 municate this in four 'words' of five figurt's with one hgure to spare. After 

 the standard |K)iiits have been put in on tracing paper, Galton suggests that 

 tracings should Ik* t^iken of the seven selected standard forms on to this paper 

 very faintly; next 



"to ImrtiKiiiitM' tlio wholti t«ntjitively with faint iind hrushliko Ktrokes; lastly, with a free and 

 timi hand to draw the outline through them." (p. 12f<.) 



Now there is little doubt that Galton's original method of numeralising 

 profiles allowed their reproduction with astonishing siccuracy, and that his 

 original six standard j)oints ])ermit of their accurate le.\iconi.siiig. Only 

 exj)erience could determine whether the loss of exactness in this his final 

 four-word method would not be at the cost of a considerable part of the 

 certainty of recognition. Galton in his paper in Natvrc gives eight illus- 

 trations and says — with which any one examining the results would agree — 

 that they are by no means deficient in resemblance to their originals. 



"I think they are considerably more like to them than the sketches, usually printed in the 

 illustrated newspapers, arc to the public characters whom tlioy profess to represent. They are, 

 to say the least, of considerable negative value siitlicing to cliininuto at the rate of about 

 nineteen out of every twenty individualn as iwt being the person referi-ed to." (p. 129.) 



It must he remembered that the resemblance provided is between a profile 

 and a profile, not between the actual person and the four-wortled reproduction 

 of his profile. Dance almost in the manner of a caricaturist emphasised 

 individual characters especially the luisal, and this I fixncy rendei-s in the 

 illustrations given in Jyature identification of the accurate profiles, and 

 their rough reproductions, relatively easy; it would be a harder matter 

 with the living subjects of the profiles. Only some experience could test 

 the utility, but it would be worth testing as the police value would un- 

 doubtedly be large. 



Galton fully recognised the limitiitions of the.se rougher nietliods, and 

 noted that the next step to an accurate profile is a large one', requiring our 

 four-word formula to be replaced by one of fifty or more words. Galton had 

 numeralised many profiles in this more elaborate way and found that normal 

 sighted persons who examined them at a distance of 12 inches in a somewhat 

 careless way did not distinguish them from the originals. By such profiles it 

 would be possible to recogiuse the living. I am far less certiim that the rough 

 profiles suggested in the 1910 paper would be lulequate, they certainly would 

 not preserve anything in the nature of an artistic chanicterisation, which 50 

 to 80 wort! fonnulae undoubtedly achieve. Here we must leave the matter 

 as Galton left it, until another scientific worker feels able to spend a like 

 number of yeare and an e(|ual enthusiasm on the analysis of portraiture. 



' " I do not find that a general resemblance can be much increased by using one or a few 

 more quintets or words." (p. 130.) 



