She writes: "It would only
be giving good value for his money" (12 pounds, 10s.) "to his
churchwardens if Hall added (sic) a cloak, a pen, and manuscript."
He "could not help changing" the face, and so on.
Now it was physically impossible to ADD a cloak, a pen, and
manuscript to such a stone bust as Dugdale's man shows; to take away
the cushion pressed to the stomach, and to alter the head. Mr. Hall,
if he was to give us the present bust, had to make an entirely new
bust, and, to give us the present monument in place of that shown in
Dugdale's print, had to construct an entirely new monument. Now Hall
was a painter, not (like Giulio Romano) also an architect and
sculptor. Pour tout potage he had but 12 pounds, 10s. He could not
do, and he did not do these things! he did not destroy "the original
monument" and make a new monument in Jacobean style. He was straitly
ordered to "repair and beautify the original monument"; he did repair
it, and repainted the colours. That is all. I do not quote what
Halliwell-Phillipps tells us {183a} about the repairing of the
forefinger and thumb of the right hand, and the pen; work which, he
says, had to be renewed by William Roberts of Oxford in 1790. He
gives no authority, and Baconians may say that he was hoaxed, or
"lied with circumstance."
Mr. Greenwood {183b} quotes Halliwell-Phillipps's Works of
Shakespeare (1853), in which he says that the design in Dugdale's
book "is evidently too inaccurate to be of any authority; the
probability being that it was not taken from the monument itself.
Pages:
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172