The invention of dactylography in the nineteenth century was inextricably linked to the imperial encounter between the British and their colonial subjects in India. Represented as a scientific technology, fingerprinting was used to produce abstract images of Indian bodies that could be placed within an archival system. The semiotic properties of fingerprinting along with the adaptability of a fingerprint as a visual image were critical to the successful operation of the practice. This article situates the history of fingerprinting in colonial India within a larger system of visual technology used by the British in institutions such as prisons. Through a comparison of different nineteenth-century technologies adopted in India, including photography, anthropometry, and fingerprinting, I argue for the recognition of a visual culture of fingerprinting that was key to the practice’s proliferation as a science.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mira Rai Waits (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: