I counted about five and a half heads because the eyeline is halfway point of the head, If I misjudged then me bad if it was six it's still way off anyhow, the head is too deep by far I agree. I just can't see how this was not spotted and corrected. The thing is, after sculpting it's always a good idea to put it away for a time out of sight then look at it again and the eye sees it as new, fresh and faults are more apparent. The arms look far too long too and tubular and there is no indication of the weight of the child reflected in the adult figure. This critique is fair. If anyone goes on other artistic forums the criticisms are way harder than these yet people accept and take them in good grace and see it as a positive thing. We are all learning, we never perfect just improve hopefully. Also to be fair the standard measurement for sculpting in the nineteenth century wasn't eight heads but seven to seven and a half, that's also something to bear in mind. People today are much bigger, go see the uniforms in museums, if you tried one on the seams would split. I tried a first empire french cuirass on once and it was short by a mile and a very tight fit and I was pretty skinny too back then!