Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mystery Of The 'missing' Shakespeare Portrait
New Scientist ^ | 10-30-2007

Posted on 10/30/2007 2:03:48 PM PDT by blam

Mystery of 'missing' Shakespeare portrait

30 October 2007
NewScientist.com news service

It is the kind of argument William Shakespeare himself would have enjoyed. On one side is a claim that a famous portrait of the Bard has gone missing and been replaced by a fake. On the other side, the claim is dismissed as nonsense.

The row is over a painting of Shakespeare known as the Flower portrait. Hildegard Hammerschmidt-Hummel from the University of Mainz, Germany, examined the portrait in 1996 and pronounced it an authentic representation of Shakespeare, painted in 1609. In 2006, the National Portrait Gallery in London exhibited what it believes to be the same portrait, but what Hammerschmidt-Hummel claims is a copy. This copy, she says, has a more modern wooden panel, and the outline of a Madonna detected beneath the paint by X-rays in 2005 is significantly different from that recorded in a 1966 X-ray. The painting she examined in 1996, Hammerschmidt-Hummel says, has "vanished" and been replaced by a copy.

Not true, insists Tarnya Cooper, who examined the painting in 2005 as curator at the National Portrait Gallery. The idea that the original Flower portrait had been substituted by a copy was "plainly nonsensical".

There's another twist. Cooper says that in any case the Flower portrait was not painted in Shakespeare's time; it is a 19th-century fake. She puts down any perceived differences in images of the painting to lighting conditions.

(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: art; chandosportrait; fake; flowerportrait; graftonportrait; missing; portrait; shakespeare; tarnyacooper; thebard

The Flower Portrait

Based on the famous engraving which appeared in the first printed edition of Shakespeare's plays, published in 1623, this portrait was produced in the early 19th Century.

The work was purchased by Edgar Flower in 1892 and presented to the Royal Shakespeare Company three years later.

1 posted on 10/30/2007 2:03:50 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: blam

Chandos Portrait

3 posted on 10/30/2007 2:07:08 PM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Grafton Portrait

4 posted on 10/30/2007 2:08:12 PM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam

Sanders Portrait

5 posted on 10/30/2007 2:09:17 PM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam

The Janssen Portrait

6 posted on 10/30/2007 2:10:16 PM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

The Soest Portrait

7 posted on 10/30/2007 2:11:06 PM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

I’m thinking the 460-year-old clam had something to do with this.


8 posted on 10/30/2007 2:14:01 PM PDT by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
shakespeare by Picasso.
9 posted on 10/30/2007 3:27:42 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Another Picasso. Ugly arent they!
10 posted on 10/30/2007 3:29:07 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Another Picasso. Ugly arent they!

Yes, they are. Really, what a damn fraud.

11 posted on 10/30/2007 4:06:26 PM PDT by Fairview ( Everybody is somebody else's weirdo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: blam

All are remarkably similar. Must be good representations of the man.


12 posted on 10/30/2007 4:14:38 PM PDT by WVNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Fairview
I remember the controversy over the drawing in post #9.

It was the 400th year of Shakespeare’s birth, When mentioned to Picasso, he took a piece of paper and using pen and ink, used only 14 lines to do the drawing.

The critics were ecstatic! A Picasso worth a fortune! 14 lines! Wow!

Others said it was just a scribble and worth nothing.

13 posted on 10/30/2007 4:22:58 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WVNan

Then of course there is the age-old controversy that Shakespeare didn’t write the plays.


14 posted on 10/30/2007 5:16:14 PM PDT by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson