den achievement, we have, I imagine, a fairly complete explanation of the facts.
If now we compare the results in the different groups we reach other interesting conclusions. Speaking roughly, one may say that the numbers showing distinct promise before twenty in the several classes are represented by the following fractions:
| Musicians | 12/12 | ||
| Artists | 8/9 | ||
| Scholars | 5/6 | ||
| equal | Poets | 3/4 | |
| Novelists | 3/4 | ||
| Men of science | 3/4 | ||
| Philosophers | 2/3 |
In order, however, to get a just idea of the relative proportions of the several classes, we must further compare them in respect of the date of the commencement of the productive period and also of the age at which distinction is attained. If we take work before thirty as representing early production, we find the proportions in the different groups to be approximately as follows:
| Musicians | 1/1 | ||
| Artists | 41/42 | ||
| Poets | 11/12 | ||
| Scientists | 4/5 | ||
| Scholars | 5/7 | ||
| Philosophers | 5/9 | ||
| Novelists | 9/16 |
Finally, with respect to the age of distinction, we learn that the following proportions attain this point before forty:
| [1]equal | Musicians | 1/1 | |
| Artists | 1/1 | ||
| equal | Poets | 11/12 | |
| Scientists | 11/12 | ||
| Scholars | 9/10 | ||
| Novelists | 4/5 | ||
| Philosophers | 3/5 |
It will be seen at once, on comparing these tables, that on the whole the order of the classes in point of precocity corresponds pretty closely with the order in which we have examined them. Musicians and artists stand at the head of the list throughout, and philosophers come last in two out of three of the scales. On the other hand, the relative position of the intermediate groups—poets, scholars, novelists, and scientists—varies considerably in the different scales.
Without attempting an exhaustive explanation of these figures, a remark or two may be hazarded as to the more potent influences at work:
- ↑ If we make twenty-five the limit, we find that artists just surpass musicians.
