It looks like that story is apocryphal. There's a reddit question which refutes this idea [0] and provides some sources (which are paywalled) [1] [2]. That re

It looks like that story is apocryphal. There's a reddit question which refutes this idea [0] and provides some sources (which are paywalled) [1] [2]. That reddit question also has a source [3] that claims Galton used the term "normal" in the "standard model, pattern type" sense from the 1880s onwards: """ ... However in the 1880s he began using the term "normal" systematically: chapter 5 of his Natural Inheritance (1889) is entitled "Normal Variability" and Galton refers to the "normal curve of distributions" or simply the "normal curve." Galton does not explain why he uses the term "normal" but the sense of conforming to a norm ( = "A standard, model, pattern, type." (OED)) seems implied. """ Though I haven't confirmed, it looks like Gauss never used the term "normal" to denote orthogonality of the curve. Do you have a source? [0] reddit.com/r/statistics/comments/rvuj4r/q_why_did_karl_pearson_call_the_gaussian [1] https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Statistics_and_Public_Policy/TN3_d7ibo30C?hl=en&gbpv=0 https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Statistics_and_Public... [2] https://www.jstor.org/stable/2684625 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2684625 [3] https://condor.depaul.edu/ntiourir/NormalOrigin.htm https://condor.depaul.edu/ntiourir/NormalOrigin.htm