THE I ADVERTISEMENT. HE reader may obferve that, contrary to former ufage, no head of Shakfpeare is prefixed to the prefent edition of his plays. The undifguifed fact is this. The only portrait of him that even pretends to authenticity, by means of injudicious cleaning, or fome other accident, has become little better than the "fhadow of a fhade." The late Sir Joshua Reynolds indeed once fuggefted, that whatever perfon it was defigned for, it might have been left, as it now appears, unfinished. Various copies and plates, however, are faid at different times to have been made from it; buta regard for truth obliges us to confefs that they are all unlike each other, † and convey no diftinct refemblance of the poor remains of their avowed original. Of the drapery and curling hair exhibited in the * Such, we think, were the remarks, that occurred to us feveral years ago, when this portrait was acceffible. We wished indeed to have confirmed them by a fecond view of it; but a late accident in the noble family to which it belongs, has precluded us from that fatisfa&ion. + Vertue's portraits have been over-praifed on account of their fidelity; for we have now before us fix different heads of Shakspeare engraved by him, and do not fcruple to affert that they have individually a different caft of countenance. Cucullus non facit monachum. The fhape of our author's ear-ring and falling-band may correfpond in them all, but where fhall we find an equal conformity in his features? Few objects indeed are occafionally more difficult to feize, than the Blender traits that mark the character of a face; and the eye will often VOL. I. a excellent engravings of Mr. Vertue, Mr. Hall, and Mr. Knight, the painting does not afford a veftige; nor is there a feature or circumftance on the whole canvas, that can with minute precifion be delineated. -We must add, that on very vague and dubious authority this head has hitherto been received as a genuine portrait of our author, who probably left behind him no fuch memorial of his face. As he was carelefs of the future ftate of his works, his folicitude might not have extended to the perpetuation of his looks. Had any portrait of him exifled, we may naturally fuppofe it must have belonged to his family, who (as Mark Antony fays of a hair of Cæfar) would have mention'd it within their wills, "Bequeathing it as a rich legacy and were there ground for the report that Shakspeare But in fupport of either fuppofition fufficient evidence has not been produced. The former of deted the want of them, when the most exact mechanical process cannot decide on the places in which they are omitted.-Vertue, in short, though a laborious, was a very indifferent draughtfman, and his best copies too often exhibit a general inftead of a particular refemblance. thefe tales has no better foundation than the vanity of our degener Neoptolemus, (fee Vol. III. p. 344.) * and the latter originates from modern conjecture. The prefent age will probably allow the vintner's ivy to Sir William, but with equal juflice will withhold from him the poet's bays. To his pretenfions of descent from Shakspeare, one might almost be induced to apply a ludicrous paffage uttered by Fielding's Phaeton in the Suds: by all the parifh boys I'm flamm'd: "You the SUN's fon, you rafcal! you be d-d." About the time when this picture found its way into Mr. Keck's hands,f the verification of portraits Nor does the fame piece of ancient fcandal derive much weight from Aubrey's adoption of it. The reader who is acquainted with the writings of this abfurd goffip, will scarcely pay more attention to him on the prefent occafion, than when he gravely affures us that "Anno 1670, not far from Cirencester was an apparition; being demanded whether a good spirit or a bad? returned no answer, but disappeared with a curious perfume and moft melodious twang. Mr. W. Lilly believes it was a fairy." See Aubrey's Mifcellanies, edit. 1784, p. 114.-Aubrey, in fhort, was a dupe to every wag who chofe to practife on his credulity; and would moft certainly have believed the perfon who fhould have told him that Shakspeare himself was a natural fon of Queen Elizabeth. Mr. T. Warton has pleasantly obferved (fee p. 73. n. 3.) that he can not suppose Shakspeare to have been the father of a Doctor of Divinity who never laughed;" and-to waste no more words on Sir William D'Avenant,-let but our readers furvey is heavy, vulgar, unmeaning face, and, if we miftake not, they will as readily conclude that Shak speare "never holp to make it." So defpicable, indeed, is bis couns tenance as reprefented by Faithorne, that it appears to have funk that celebrated engraver beneath many a common artift in the fame line. See Vol. I. p. 30. was fo little attended to, that both the Earl of Oxford, and Mr. Pope, admitted a juvenile one of King James I. as that of Shakspeare.* Among the heads of illuftrious perfons engraved by Houbraken, are feveral imaginary ones, befide Ben Jonfon's and Otway's; and old Mr. Langford pofitively afferted that, in the fame collection, the grandfather of Cock the auctioneer had the honour to perfonate the great and amiable Thurloe, fecretary of flate to Oliver Cromwell. From the price of forty guincas paid for the fuppofed portrait of our author to Mrs. Barry, the real value of it fhould not be inferred. The poffeffion of fomewhat more animated than canvas, might have been included, though not specified, in a bargain with an actrefs of acknowledged gallantry. Yet allowing this to be a mere fanciful infinuation, a rich man does not easily mifs what he is ambitious to find. At least he may be perfuaded he has found it, a circumflance which, as far as it *Much refpe& is due to the authority of portraits that defcend in families from heir to heir; but little reliance can be placed on them when they are produced for fale (as in the prefent inflance) by alien hands, almost a century after the death of the perfon fuppofed to be reprefented; and then, (as Edmund fays in King Lear) "come pat, like the catastrophe of the old comedy." Shakspeare was buried in 1616; and in 1708 the first notice of this picture occurs. Where there is fuch a chafm in evidence, the validity of it may be not unfairly queftioned, and especially by those who remember a fpecies of fraudulence recorded in Mr. Foote's Tafte: Clap Lord Dupe's arms on that half-length of Erafmus; I have fold it him as his great grandfather's third brother, for fifty guineas." |