ir interpretations, the
less I am troubled with this clumsy framework for them, but it is
indelible in my mind's eye even when for a long time less
consciously so. The higher numbers are to me quite abstract and
unconnected with a shape. This rough and untidy [8] production is
the best I can do towards representing what I see. There was a
little difficulty in the performance, because it is only by catching
oneself at unawares, so to speak, that one is quite sure that what
one sees is not affected by temporary imagination. But it does not
seem much like, chiefly because the mental picture never seems
_on_ the flat but _in_ a thick, dark gray atmosphere deepening in
certain parts, especially where 1 emerges, and about 20. How I get
from 100 to 120 I hardly know, though if I could require these
figures a few times without thinking of them on purpose, I should
soon notice. About 200 I lose all framework. I do not see the actual
figures very distinctly, but what there is of them is distinguished
from the dark by a thin whitish tracing. It is the place they take
and the shape they make collectively which is invariable. Nothing
more definitely takes its place than a person's age. The person is
usually there so long as his age is in mind."

[Footnote 8: The engraver took much pains to interpret the meaning
of the rather faint but carefully made drawing, by strengthening
some of the shades. The result was very very satisfactory, judging
from the author's own view of it, which is as follows:--"Certainly
if the engraver has been as successful with all the other
representations as with that of my shape and its accompaniments,
your article must be entirely correct."]

T. M. "The representation I carry in my mind of the numerical series
is quite distinct to me, so much so that I cannot think of any
number but I at once see it (as it were) in its peculiar place in
the diagram. My remembrance of dates is also nearly entirely
dependent on a clear mental vision of their _loci_ in the diagram.
This, as nearly as I can draw it, is the following:--"

[Illustration: ]

"It is only approximately correct (if the term 'correct' be at all
applicable). The numbers seem to approach more closely as I ascend
from 10 to 20, 30, 40, etc. The lines embracing a hundred numbers
also seem to approach as I go on to 400, 500, to 1000. Beyond 1000 I
have only the sense of an infinite line in the direction of the arrow,
losing itself in darkness towards