The reading material concludes that the full-length portrait recently accepted by many people is Jane Austen, although the portrait described Jane as a teenager which is different from the painting made by Cassandra. But the professor rejected the opinion that it is Jane for three reasons that object to the supported reason in reading respectively.
First, it is impossible that the portrait used in an edition of letters which was permitted by Jane's family is really Jane herself. Because the permission occurred in 1882, and it was 70 years after the date of death of Jane; so it is possible that the family who gave this permission did not see Jane themselves. Therefore, as they had no idea about the appearance of Jane, the portrait they agreed to use may not be Jane actually.
Second, it is possible that the resemblance between the face in old painting and this one is coincident. For it is a big family owned hundreds of female members who might be like to Jane, the similarity between two pictures may likely happen. And there was an evidence that some professors found out that the face in the portrait in face is Jane's relative, her distant niece. Because of this, the teenager in painting unlikely is Jane.
Finally, it is impossible that the style which is same as Humphrey's itself can hardly prove it is Jane. And there is a proof that the man who sold the stamp used in this picture appeared later than the time that portrait drawn. When the man came to the city, it is 27-year-old that Jane was and she was no longer a teenager but an adult in fact. So the teenager in the portrait is not Jane.