Uncover his face (part 1)


Hildegard Hammerschmidt-Hummel
The True Face of William Shakespeare:
The poet’s death mask and likenesses from three periods of his life

Translated from the German by Alan Bance
Chaucer Press 2006

Here is my kind of book: a true life tale of literary detection that outshines fictional mysteries, however well written they may be. Sadly, it is also a piece of research that exposes at least two more mysteries: what has happened to two very probable Shakespeare likenesses in very recent times, centuries after the playwright’s death? But there is also pleasure and satisfaction that any lingering doubts expressed by anti-Stratfordians (“Did Shakespeare actually write Shakespeare’s plays?”) have finally been put to sleep … one hopes.

Hildegard Hammerschmidt-Hummel is a determined Shakespearean academic who, in this closely argued study, examines two portraits, two sculptured busts and a death mask in great forensic and documentary detail. She gives the cultural context for the 16th- and 17th-century creation of accurate, true-to-life, warts-and-all representations of illustrious people before then going on to describe her selected images. Then she describes the various scientific tests she applied to those images (with the help of experts in several disciplines) using procedures available in the 1990s, and then summarises the results. Finally she puts those results back into historical and biographical context.

What were those images?

The first is the painting known as the Chandos portrait (most of these pieces of art are named for one of their owners). The author argues for a date a little after 1594 and before 1599, at a time when Shakespeare and his colleague Richard Burbage (1567-1619) were both actors in the company known as the Chamberlain’s Men. Interestingly, the portrait (which it’s agreed was painted by a talented amateur) could well be by Burbage himself — his own self-portrait is in the Dulwich gallery — and was later owned in turn by succession of actors (Joseph Taylor, William Davenant and Thomas Betterton) following on from Shakespeare.

The Flower portrait has the date 1609 in the top left corner which the author argues is genuine. We now know from X-ray imagery that his portrait was painted on top of a late 15th- or early 16th-century panel of the Madonna. Before we see this as in any way sacrilegious we have to remember that this was a dangerous time to own Catholic images; John — William’s father — left a document testifying to his own Catholicism (only discovered in 1757) while Mary Arden, his mother, belonged to a staunch Catholic family. Mary’s death in 1608 may have led to the playwright to arrange the safeguarding of the icon by having his own image overlaid, the author suggests, rather than destroying it completely. As to the artist, she suggests either Maerten (or Martin) Droeshout the Elder or Marcus Geeraerts the Younger (1553-1635).

Next is the Davenant bust. This was found in 1837 adjacent to the former Lincoln Inn Fields Theatre (also known as the Duke’s Theatre) established in 1661 on the site of a converted tennis court. Sir William D’avenant or Davenant (the godson or possibly natural son of Shakespeare) owned the neighbouring house where he appears to have displayed this bust and one of Ben Jonson in wall niches. Hammerschmidt-Hummel’s researches in the Royal College of Surgeons Hunterian Museum lead her to suggest Nicholas Stone was the creator of this slightly larger than lifesize terracotta bust in 1613. This is the year Stone returns to London from training in Amsterdam and the last year Shakespeare is in London before retiring to Stratford; this is also the year, she suggests, in which Shakespeare visits Rome for the last time, assuming the name of his recently deceased brother (“Ricardus Stratfordus”).

Finally we come to the Death mask. This has a convoluted provenance, but seems to have been acquired in 1775 by Count Franz Ludwig von Kesselstadt on a trip to England. This must have been made as a model for the funerary bust in Holy Trinity church, Stratford and then discarded, somehow surviving from 1616 until the 1770s when it was taken to Germany; it is now owned by the city of Darmstadt.

These then are the four prime exhibits; what leads the author to believe these genuinely portray Shakespeare? And what further mysteries does she, after her exhaustive detective work, believe remain to plague us?

To be concluded

15 thoughts on “Uncover his face (part 1)

  1. Ooh, intriguing stuff. looking forward to the second part of your review. Interesting to think why we’re so fascinated to discover William’s true face – an early case of celebrity chasing?

    So glad to hear it helps quell those anti- Stratfordians. The argument that a grammar school boy couldn’t have produced such wonderful writing has always irritated me. ‘Surely, they must have been written by someone from a better background than that?’
    Why? Being a playwright was not a high ranking job – actors were pushed south of the Thames, with the brothels and the bear pits for a reason. Shakespeare came from ‘trade’ surely being a playwright was about right for a man of his standing? Just because he happened to be exceptionally good at it…
    Rant over. 🙂


    1. Thanks, Lynn! In my review of Contested Will I noted an 18C tendency to place WS on a pedestal, to in effect deify him. Perhaps in reaction to that there was soon a move to deny the so-called illiterate glover’s son authorship and foist it on an alternative and presumably more worthy candidate. HHH’s approach is to link the genuine likenesses with solid documentary evidence that Shakespeare’s contemporaries had no doubt as to who wrote those plays, and that this person was the one we see looking out at us from paintings and 3D images.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes, it’s a good point, isn’t it? Why would anyone allow Shakespeare to take credit (and cash) for the plays if they were their own creation. Of course, the argument in the film ‘Anonymous’ is that Edward de Vere wrote the plays and I suppose it would’ve been scandalous for a man of his stature to be involved in that life. The argument will rumble on.


        1. I’ve avoided Anonymous up till now in fear of my teeth being ground down, and I’m disappointed that actors like Derek Jacobi that I otherwise respect are avowed anti-Stratfordians. Ah well, we all have our irrational obsessions and we all love the occasional conspiracy theory … don’t we?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Well, it looks lovely but, yes truly aggravating in other respects.Especially as a history graduate, seeing the historical inacuracies bandied around. I think they suggest Shakespeare killed Philip Marlowe – grrrr!
            Mark Rylance is an anti-Stratfordian too. Disappointing. I think the conspiracy theory angle is right – people don’t want to accept the obvious answer, they love an enigma.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Ooh, I love the idea that WS killed Philip Marlowe — er, Christopher, surely?! But Will as a kind of murderous Dr Who flitting around and killing off literary characters, now that‘d be a fantastic story concept! (I give it to you, free and gratis!)

              Liked by 1 person

            2. Hahaha! That’s brilliant. You can see where my brain is today – been trying to write a post and found myself incapable. Love the idea of Will killing Philip Marlowe. Wish I’d actually thought if it. I think I should step away from the laptop now 🙂


            3. Ah! What great images. You have a whole film synopsis just there. 🙂 Will needs a dilemma, though. Maybe Loves Labours Found has been dropped in a time vortex and Will has to bounce round time trying to find it before the vortex closes? Or he has to destroy it before some attention seeking antiquarian finds, publishes it and creates a paradox, destryoing the entire space/ time continuum. Hmmm. The possibilities …


  2. Pingback: The English class system: Why people don’t want Shakespeare to be a grammar school boy. | Word Shamble

  3. Pingback: Uncover his face (part 2) | calmgrove

Do leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.