« PoprzedniaDalej »
1 ~ where a monument is placed in the wall.) He is represented under an arch, in a fitting posture, a cushion spread before him, with a pen in his right-hand, and his left rested on a scroll of paper. The following Latin distich is engraved under the cushion :
Judicio Pylium, genio Socratem, arte Maronem,
Terra tegit, populus mæret, Olympus habet. THEOBALD. The first fyllable in Socratem is here made short, which cannot be allowed. Perhaps we should read Sophoclem. Shakspeare is then appositely compared with a dramatick author among the ancients : but still it should beremembered that the elogium is lefsened while the metre is reformed; and it is well known that some of our early writers of Latin poetry were uncommonly negligent in their prosody, especially in proper names. The thought of this distich, as Mr. Tollet observes, might have been taken from The Faëry Queene of Spenser, B. II. c. ix. it. 48, and c. x. ft. 3.
To this Latin inscription on Shakspeare should be added the lines which are found underneath it on his monument:
Stay, passenger, why dost thou go so fast?
Obiit Ano. Düi. 1616.
æt. 53, die 23 Apri. STEEVENS. It appears from the Verses of Leonard Digges that out author's monument was erected before the year 1623. It has been engraved by Vertue, and done in Mezzotinto by Miller.
A writer in The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. XXIX. p. 267, says, there is as strong a resemblance between the bust at Stratford, and the portrait of our author prefixed to the first folio edition of his plays, 66 as can well be between a statue and a picture... To me (and I have viewed it several times with a good deal of attention) it appeared in a very different light. When I went last to Stratford, I carried with me the only genuine prints of Shakspeare that were then extant, and 'I could not trace any resemblance between them and this figure. There is a pertness in the countenance of the latter totally differing from that placid composure and thoughtful gravity, fo perceptible in his original portrait and his best prints. Our poet's monument having been erected by his son-in-law Dr.
Hall, the statuary probably had the affiftance of some picture, and failed only from want of skill to copy it.
Mr. Granger observes, (Biog. Hist. Vol. I. p. 259,) that " it has been said there never was an original portrait of Shakspeare, but that Sir Thomas Clarges after his death caused a portrait to be drawn for him from a person who nearly resembled him. This entertaining writer was a great collector of anecdotes, but not always very fcrupulous in inquiring into the authenticity of the information which he procured; for this improbable tale, I find, on examination, Itands only on the assertion of an anonymous writer in The Gentleman's Magazine for August 1759, who boldly " affirmed it as an abfolute fact; ,, but being afterwards publickly called upon to produce his authority, never produced any. There is the strongest reason therefore to presume it a forgery.
66 Mr. Walpolen (adds Mr. Granger} -. informs me, that the only original picture of Shakspeare is that which belonged to Mr. Keck, from whom it pafled to Mr. Nicoll, whose only daughter married the Marquis of Caernarvon » (now duke of Chandos).
From this pi&ture, his Grace, at my request, very obli. gingly permitted a drawing to be made by that excellent artist Mr. Ozias Humphry; and from that drawing the print prefixed to the prefent edition has been engraved.
In the manufcript notes of the late Mr. Oldys, this portrait is said to have been 6 painted by old Cornelius Jansen. » o. Others, 9, he adds, 6. say, that it was done by Richard Burbage the player;" and'in another place he ascribes it to 6 John Taylor, the player... This Taylor, it is said in The Critical Review for 1770, left it by will to Sir William D'Avenantr But unluckily there was no player of the christian and surname of John Taylor, contemporary with Shakspeare. The player who performed in Shakspeare's company, was Joseph Taylor. There was however a painter of the name of John Taylor, to whom in his early youth it is barely possible that we may have been indebted for the only original portrait of our author ; for in the Picture-Gallery at Oxford are two portraits of Taylor the Water-poet, and on each of them c. 7ohn Taylor pinx, 1655.,, There appears fome resemblance of manner between these portraits and the picture of Shakspeare in the duke of Chando's collection. That picture (I exprefs the opinion of Sir Joshua Reynold's) has not the least air of Cornelius Jansen's performances.
That this picture was once in the poffeffion of Sir William
D'Avenant is highly probable ; but it is much more likely to have been purchased by him from some of the players after the theatres were shut
up by authority, and the veterans of the stage were reduced to great distress, than to have been bequeathed to him by the person who painted it ; in whose custody it is improbable that it should have remained. Sir William D'Avenant appears to have died insolvent. There is no Will of his in the Prerogative-Office; but administration of his effects was granted to John Otway, his principal creditor, in May 1668. After his death, Betterton the actor bought it, probably at a publick fale of his effects. While it was in Betterton's pofleffion, it was engraved by Vandergucht, for Mr. Rowe's edition of Shakfpeare, in 1709. Betterton made no will, and died very indigent. He had a large collection of portraits of actors in crayons, which were bought at the fale of his goods by Bullfinch the Printfeller, who fold them to one Mr. Sykes. The portrait of Shakspeare was purchased by Mrs. Barry the actress, who fold it afterwards for 40 guineas to Mr. Robert Keck. In 1719, while it was in Mr. Keck's poffefsion, an engraving was made from it by Vertue : a large half-sheet. Mr. Nicoll of Colney-Hatch, Middlesex, marrying the heiress of the Keck family, this picture devolved to him; and while in his possession, it was, in 1747, engraved by Houbraken for Birch's Illustrious Heads. By the marriage of the duke of Chandos with the daughter of Mr. Nicoll, it became his Grace's property.
Sir Godfrey Kneller painted a picture of our author, which he presented to Dryden, but from what picture he copied, I am unable to ascertain, as I have never seen Kneller's picture. The poet repayed him by an elegant copy of Verses: -- See his Poems, Vol. II. p. 231, edit. 1743.
Shakspeare, thy gift, I place before my sight,
" When most they rail, know then, they envy mot." It appears from a circumstance mentioned by Dryden, that these verses were written after the year 1683 : probably after Rhymer's book had appeared in 1693. Dryden having made no will, and his wife Lady Elizabeth renouncing, adminiltra
tion was granted on the 10th of June 1700, to his fon Charles, who was drowned in the Thames near Windsor in 1704. His younger brother Erasmus fucceeded to the title of Baronet, and died without ifiue in 1711; but I know not what became of his effects, or where this picture is now to be found.
About the year 1728 a mezzotinto of Shakspeare was fcraped by Simon, said to be done from an original picture painted by Zouft or Soeit, then in the possefsion of T. Wright, painter, in Covent-Garden. The earliest known picture painted by Zouft in England, was done in 1657; so that if he ever painted a picture of Shakspeare, it must have been a copy. It could not however have been made from D'Avenant's picture, (unless the painter took very great liberties) for the whole air, dress, disposition of the hair, &c. are different. I have lately seen a picture in the poffeffion of -- Douglas. Efq.at Teddington near Twickenham, which is, I believe, the very picture from which Simon's Mezzotinto was made. It is on canvas, (about 24 inches by 20,) and somewhat smaller than the life.
The earliest print of our poet that appeared, is that in the title-page of the first folio edition of his works, 1623, engraved by Martin Droeshout. On this print the following lines, addressed to THE READER, were written by Ben Jonson ;
". This figure that thou here seest put,
Not on his picture, but his look." Droelhout engraved also the heads of John Fox the martyrologist, Montjoy Blount, son of Charles Blount Earl of Devonfhire, William Fairfax who fell at the fiege of Frankendale in 1621, and John Howfon, bishop of Durham. The portrait of Bishop Howfon is at Christ-church, Oxford. By comparing any of these prints (the two latter which are well executed) with the original pictures from whence the engravings were made, a better judgment might be formed of the fidelity of our author's portrait, as exhibited by this engraver, than from Jonfon's assertion, that “in this figure
the graver had a strife
in that year.
a compliment which in the books of that age was paid to so many engravers, that nothing decisive can be inferred from it:-- It does not appear from what picture this engraving was made ; but from the dress, and the lingular disposition of the hair, &c. it undoubtedly was engraved from a picture, and probably a very ordinary one. There is no other way of accounting for the great difference between this print of Droeshout's, and his fpirited portraits of Fairfax and Bishop Howfon, butby supposing that the picture of Shakfpeare from which he copied was a very coarse performance.
The next print in point of time is, according to Mr. Walpole, and Mr. Granger, that executed by J. Payne, a scholar of Simon Pass, in 1634: with a laurel branch in the poet's lefthand. A print of Shakspeare by so excellent an engraver as Payne, would probably exhibit a more perfect representation of him than any other of those times : but I much doubt whether any fuch ever existed. Mr. Granger, I apprehend, has erroneously attributed to Payne the head done by Marshall in 1640, ( apparently from Droeshout's larger print,) which is prefixed to a spurious edition of Shakspeare's Poems published
In Marshall's print the poet has a laurel branch in his left hand.
Neither Mr. Walpole, nor any of the other great collectors of prints, are poffelled of, or ever faw, any print of Shakspeare by Payne, as far as I can learn.
Two other prints only remain to be mentioned; one engraved by Vertue in 1721, for Mr. Pope's edition of ouë author's plays in quarto ; faid to be engraved from an original picture in the poffeffion of the Earl of Oxford; and another, a mezzotinto, by Earlom prefixed to an edition of King Lear, in 1770; faid to be done from an original by Cornelius Jansen, in the collection of Charles Jennens; Efq. but, Mr. Granger juftly observes, . " as it is dated in 1610, before Jansen was in England, it is highly probable that it was not painted by him, at least, that he did not paint it as a portrait of Shakspeare."
Most of the other prints of Shakspeare that have appeared, were copied from fome or other of those which I have mentioned.
MALONE. “ The portrait palmed upon Mr. Pope" (I use the words of the late Mr. Oldys, in a Mf. note to his copy of Langbaine,) " for an original of Shakspeare, from which he had his fine VOLI.