Part 19 (2/2)

Mrs Hall's only child, Elizabeth, was the last surviving descendant of the poet In April 1626 she married her first husband, Thomas Nash of Stratford (_b_ 1593), who studied at Lincoln's Inn, was achildless at New Place on April 4, 1647, was buried in Stratford Church next day At Billesley, a village four miles from Stratford, on June 5, 1649, Mrs Nash married, as a second husband, a er, John Bernard or Barnard of Abington, Northahted by Charles II in 1661 About the same date she seems to have abandoned New Place for her husband's residence at Abington Dying without issue, she was buried there on February 17, 1669-70 Her husband survived her four years, and was buried beside her {282} On her mother's death in 1649 Lady Barnard inherited under the poet's will the land near Stratford, New Place, the house at Blackfriars, and (on the death of the poet's sister, Joan Hart, in 1646) the houses in Henley Street, while her father, Dr Hall, left her in 1635 a house at Acton with a meadow She sold the Blackfriars house, and apparently the Stratford land, before 1667 By her will, dated January 1669-70, and proved in the following March, she left shters of Thorandmother, the poet's wife

The houses in Henley Street passed to her cousin, Thorandson of the poet's sister Joan, and they remained in the possession of Thomas's direct descendants till 1806 (the male line expired on the death of John Hart in 1800) By her will Lady Barnard also ordered New Place to be sold, and it was purchased on May 18, 1675, by Sir Edward Walker, through whose daughter Barbara, wife of Sir John Clopton, it reverted to the Clopton fah in 1752, it was bought by the Rev Francis Gastrell (_d_ 1768), who de in 1759 {283}

Shakespeare's brothers

Of Shakespeare's three brothers, only one, Gilbert, seeest brother, 'a player,' was buried at St Saviour's Church, Southwark, 'with a fore-noone knell of the great bell,' on Decehth year Richard, John Shakespeare's third son, died at Stratford in February 1613, aged 29 'Gilbert Shakespeare adolescens,' as buried at Stratford on February 3, 1611-12, was doubtless son of the poet's next brother, Gilbert; the latter, having nearly completed his forty-sixth year, could scarcely be described as 'adolescens;' his death is not recorded, but according to Oldys he survived to a patriarchal age

XVIII--AUTOGRAPHS, PORTRAITS, AND MEMORIALS

Spelling of the poet's surnanatures

Much controversy has arisen over the spelling of the poet's surname It has been proved capable of four thousand variations {284} The name of the poet's father is entered sixty-six times in the council books of Stratford, and is spelt in sixteen ways The coraphs of the poet of undisputed authenticity are extant: his signature to the indenture relating to the purchase of the property in Blackfriars, dated March 10, 1612-13 (since 1841 in the Guildhall Library); his signature to theto the same purchase, dated March 11, 1612-13 (since 1858 in the British Museunatures on the three sheets of his will, dated March 25, 1615-16 (now at Sonatures sons of abbreviation The signature to the first docuh in all other portions of the deed the nanature to the second document has been interpreted both as Shakspere and Shakspeare The ink of the first signature in the will has now faded almost beyond decipherment, but that it was 'Shakspere' may be inferred from the facsinatures to the will, which are also somewhat difficult to decipher, have been read both as Shakspere and Shakspeare; but a close exanatureof the alleged autograph in the British Museuenuineness of that signature is disputable {285} Shakespeare was the fornature appended to the dedicatory epistles of the 'Venus and Adonis' of 1593 and the 'Lucrece' of 1594, volumes which were produced under the poet's supervision It is the spelling adopted on the title-pages of the majority of contemporary editions of his works, whether or not produced under his supervision It is adopted in al the seventeenth century

It appears in the grant of arms in 1596, in the license to the players of 1603, and in the text of all the legal docu to the poet's property The poet, like ed no finality on the subject According to the best authority, he spelt his surna his will There is consequently no good ground for abandoning the foral and literary custom {286}

Shakespeare's portraits The Stratford bust The 'Stratford' portrait

Aubrey reported that Shakespeare was 'a handsome well-shap't man,' but no portrait exists which can be said with absolute certainty to have been executed during his lifetiood claim to that distinction Only two of the extant portraits are positively known to have been produced within a short period after his death These are the bust in Stratford Church and the frontispiece to the folio of 1623 Each is an inartistic attempt at a posthumous likeness There is considerable discrepancy between the two; their main points of resemblance are the baldness on the top of the head and the fulness of the hair about the ears The bust was by Gerard Johnson or Janssen, as a Dutch stonemason or tombmaker settled in Southwark

It was set up in the church before 1623, and is a rudely carved specimen of mortuary sculpture There are est that the face was fashi+oned from a death mask, but the workmanshi+p is at all points clumsy The round face and eyes present a heavy, unintellectual expression The bust was originally coloured, but in 1793 Malone caused it to be ashed In 1861 the as removed, and the colours, as far as traceable, restored The eyes are light hazel, the hair and beard auburn There have been nuraphic It was first engraved--very imperfectly--for Rowe's edition in 1709; then by Vertue for Pope's edition of 1725; and by Gravelot for Han by William Ward appeared in 1816 A phototype and a chromo-phototype, issued by the New Shakspere Society, are the best reproductions for the purposes of study The pretentious painting known as the 'Stratford' portrait, and presented in 1867 by W O Hunt, town clerk of Stratford, to the Birthplace Museum, where it is very prominently displayed, was probably painted frohteenth century; it lacks either historic or artistic interest

Droeshout's engraving

The engraved portrait--nearly a half-length--which was printed on the title-page of the folio of 1623, was by Martin Droeshout On the opposite page lines by Ben Jonson congratulate 'the graver' on having satisfactorily 'hit' the poet's 'face' Jonson's testimony does no credit to his artistic discernment; the expression of countenance, which is very crudely rendered, is neither distinctive nor lifelike The face is long and the forehead high; the top of the head is bald, but the hair falls in abundance over the ears There is a scanty moustache and a thin tuft under the lower lip A stiff and wide collar, projecting horizontally, conceals the neck The coat is closely buttoned and elaborately bordered, especially at the shoulders The die as compared with those of the body In the unique proof copy which belonged to Halliwell-Phillipps (noith his collection in America) the tone is clearer than in the ordinary copies, and the shadows are less darkened by cross-hatching and coarse dotting The engraver, Martin Droeshout, belonged to a Fle settled in London, where he was born in 1601 He was thus fifteen years old at the time of Shakespeare's death in 1616, and it is consequently ie of the dra was doubtless produced by Droeshout very shortly before the publication of the First Folio in 1623, when he had cos to the outset of the engraver's professional career, in which he never achieved extended practice or reputation A copy of the Droeshout engraving, by William Marshall, was prefixed to Shakespeare's 'Poems' in 1640, and William Faithorne made another copy for the frontispiece of the edition of 'The Rape of Lucrece' published in 1655

The 'Droeshout' painting

There is little doubt that young Droeshout in fashi+oning his engraving worked froinal picture froht

As recently as 1892 Mr Edgar Flower, of Stratford-on-Avon, discovered in the possession of Mr H C Cle at Peckhaed to represent Shakespeare The picture, which was faded and someorm-eaten, dated beyond all doubt from the early years of the seventeenth century It was painted on a panel formed of two planks of old elm, and in the upper left-hand corner was the inscription 'Willm Shakespeare, 1609' Mr

Clements purchased the portrait of an obscure dealer about 1840, and knew nothing of its history, beyond what he set down on a slip of paper when he acquired it The note that he then wrote and pasted on the box in which he preserved the picture, ran as follows: 'The original portrait of Shakespeare, fro was taken and inserted in the first collected edition of his works, published in 1623, being seven years after his death The picture was painted nine [_vere_ seven] years before his death, and consequently sixteen [_vere_ fourteen]

years before it was publishedThe picture was publicly exhibited in London seventy years ago, and many thousands went to see it' In all its details and in its comparative dimensions, especially in the disproportion between the size of the head and that of the body, this picture is identical with the Droeshout engraving Though coarsely and stiffly drawn, the face is far , and the expression of countenance betrays some artistic senti Sir Edward Poynter, Mr Sidney Colvin, and Mr Lionel Cust, have almost unreservedly pronounced the picture to be anterior in date to the engraving, and they have reached the conclusion that in all probability Martin Droeshout directly based his work upon the painting Influences of an early seventeenth-century Flemish school are plainly discernible in the picture, and it is just possible that it is the production of an uncle of the young engraver Martin Droeshout, who bore the same name as his nephew, and was naturalised in this country on January 25, 1608, when he was described as a 'painter of Brabant' Although the history of the portrait rests on critical conjecture and on no external conte it as a portrait of Shakespeare painted in his lifetie

No other pictorial representation of the poet has equally serious claims to be treated as contemporary with himself, and it therefore presents features of unique interest On the death of its owner, Mr Cle was purchased by Mrs Charles Flower, and was presented to the Mes No atteravure forms the frontispiece to the present volume {290}