I want to share why I am posting this paper and why I think this is an interesting read. From "Henry Faulds Proposes Fingerprints as a System of Identification":
> In a one page letter published in the London journal Nature on October 28, 1880, Henry Faulds was the first to propose the use of fingerprints as a system of identification, including the scientific identification of criminals.
From the paper itself:
> When bloody finger-marks or impressions on clay, glass, etc., exist, they may lead to the scientific identification of criminals. Already I have had experience in two such cases, and found useful evidence from these marks. In one case greasy finger-marks revealed who had been drinking some rectified spirit. The pattern was unique, and fortunately I had previously obtained a copy of it. They agreed with microscopic fidelity. In another case sooty finger-marks of a person climbing a white wall were of great use as negative evidence. .....
Apparently the distribution of patterns (whorls, arches, loops, etc) varies by ethnicity, but not that much. So for an individual set of prints you can't determine anything reliably. It's not really genetic, rather determined mostly by the blood temperature and flow while you're a fetus, like a animal's precise fur pattern.
I want to share why I am posting this paper and why I think this is an interesting read. From "Henry Faulds Proposes Fingerprints as a System of Identification":
https://historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=525
> In a one page letter published in the London journal Nature on October 28, 1880, Henry Faulds was the first to propose the use of fingerprints as a system of identification, including the scientific identification of criminals.
From the paper itself:
> When bloody finger-marks or impressions on clay, glass, etc., exist, they may lead to the scientific identification of criminals. Already I have had experience in two such cases, and found useful evidence from these marks. In one case greasy finger-marks revealed who had been drinking some rectified spirit. The pattern was unique, and fortunately I had previously obtained a copy of it. They agreed with microscopic fidelity. In another case sooty finger-marks of a person climbing a white wall were of great use as negative evidence. .....
Here's the article as it originally appeared in the journal "Nature": https://archive.org/details/nature221880lock/mode/2up
Very cool historical doc, thanks for sharing.
Curious if his idea of determining the race of the individual from the fingerprint is possible. Never heard that idea before.
Apparently the distribution of patterns (whorls, arches, loops, etc) varies by ethnicity, but not that much. So for an individual set of prints you can't determine anything reliably. It's not really genetic, rather determined mostly by the blood temperature and flow while you're a fetus, like a animal's precise fur pattern.
Tangentially related, perhaps, but one of my favorite journal articles:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2997957/