strong family likeness! This has been observed by others whose attention has been since drawn to this peculiarity. It has been suggested that the two portraits from Henleystreet are probably those of Dr. Hall and his wife Susanna before she was married, and that the picture recently discovered is a likeness of the same lady at a later period of life. There is, however, another way of explaining the singular family resemblance in the portraits. One may be Dr. Hall and his wife, and the young lady their daughter Elizabeth. Or, is it possible that Mr. Nash, to whom the grand-daughter of Shakspere was first married, may be represented in the portrait of the gentleman? I am inclined to rely on the tradition that has hitherto considered it that of Dr. Hall, and that the young lady is Elizabeth Hall, the daughter, who married Mr. Nash of Welcome; in that case, the recently-discovered portrait may be a likeness of the same lady at a later period of life, or a likeness of her mother. It is, however, very singular that while the portrait was in the possession of the Attwoods and the Wards, it was always designated "Susanna Hall, the daughter of Shakspere ;" and now, after an interval of two centuries, the portrait, when placed beside others from Henley-street, and probably New Place, clearly shows that it belongs to the same family group. Dr. Hall died in 1635, leaving his property to his wife and daughter. Susanna died 11th July, 1649. Elizabeth, the daughter, was married to her first husband, Thomas Nash, in 1626. She afterwards married Sir John Bernard, who was knighted by Charles II. in 1661. Lady Bernard died at Abington, near Northampton, in February, 1669-70. Now, from several well-established facts, it is known that Lady Bernard manifested great affection and regard for her relatives, the Harts in Henley-street, and also for the family of her grandmother, the Hathaways of Shottery. By her will, Lady Bernard bequeathed legacies of forty and fifty pounds each to six members of the Hathaway family, thereby testifying to her respect for the memory of her ancestor Anne Shakspere. She also left two houses in Henley-street-one of them the birthplace of her grandfather-to Thomas Hart, grandson of Shakspere's brotherin-law, William Hart; and to her kinsman, Edward Bagley, citizen of London, she bequeathed the residue of her property. It is possible, and indeed probable, that Lady Bernard would take the portrait of her mother in preference to her own, and that the portrait of Susanna was part of the personal property conveyed to London, from whence it was ultimately sent to the Hathaways at Shottery, and has remained in obscurity till the present day; and when placed beside other portraits that have hitherto been treated with indifference and neglect, they all in a most singular and unexpected way prove their relationship. This pedigree of the three portraits is a simple history of their existence in the families of the descendants of the Harts and the Hathaways—of all persons the most likely to possess such relics. They have nothing about them indicative of the picture-dealer's restorations. They are portraits painted by the hand of a master, and are in a style suited to persons of wealth and condition beyond those living either in Henley-street or at Shottery. The height of each picture is, with the frame, 39 inches, and in breadth 34 inches. They would not be purchased as ornaments, as they are too large for the walls of such tenements; nor would they be bought on speculation, because the owners could never find purchasers for them as unknown portraits. It is more reasonable to consider them as heir-looms left among a family that has from various causes lost not only its former wealth and position, but also the associations by which the relics were once surrounded. The portrait called Susanna Hall belongs to persons unacquainted with the value of pictures, as the husband, an agricultural labourer, can only earn 10s. a-week, and when attending a thrashing-machine, a little more; and being unable to read or write, he is not likely to know the value of the picture, either as a luxury, as a work of art, or as a Shaksperian relic; and values it merely as a memento of his wife's family descent from the Hathaways of Shottery. As the pedigree of the Susanna portrait is traced back to the end of the 17th century, there is only a comparatively brief period between the death of Lady Bernard and the appearance of the portrait at Shottery; after which I have, for the first time, traced it to Darlingcote, Treddington, Alveston, and now again at Stratford. As the three portraits have a strong family likeness, and as the Susanna portrait has a singular resemblance to the Jansens and to the mask, their similarity will be a strange and rather marvellous coincidence, if they are not likenesses of Shakspere's family. It may be asked-How is it that those who have devoted some thirty years attention to this subject have not hitherto discovered any connection between these portraits and the children of Shakspere? The answer is, the portraits have never previously been compared with each other; the Susanna has till now remained in obscurity, and unknown, and those from Henley-street have been viewed with prejudice, or treated with indifference. They are still at Stratford to challenge investigation by the committee of the Shakspere Museum, where, if possible, these portraits, with their pedigrees, ought to be preserved. If I have succeeded in establishing the claims of those from Henleystreet, or that from Shottery, to belong to the family of Shakspere, I shall be rewarded for the trouble which has been necessary to ascertain the facts establishing the authenticity of these interesting and beautiful portraits; which, if genuine, tend to confirm by their physiognomies the accuracy of the views already recorded in favour of the Jansen Portrait and the Mask of Shakspere. The Ethnic Physiognomies of Warwickshire. As the facial contour of the two races of Warwickshire have been cited in reference to the portraits of Shakspere, an explanation may be necessary. It will be admitted that there are features so marked, distinct, and characteristic among men, that they may be classed under typical names, such as the Roman, the Grecian, the Aquiline, the Teuton, or the Celtic. These are some of the signs of racial origin, and easily distinguished. History tells us that the earliest inhabitants of Britain were the Belge or Celtic, who were visited by the tradeventurers from the shores of the Mediterranean. The tidewave of civilisation and power brought Cæsar and the Roman Eagles to settle and brood on the island. The result may be seen in the stern features, wiry frames, and cranial characteristics of those in whom the governing element is predominant. Although the Saxons ultimately gained the ascendant, the Roman legionaries remained long enough to establish their race and leave their blood behind them. The Northmen followed, bringing their lofty stature, their great strength and courage; and then came the Norman as a second branch of the Norseman. The military adventurers who followed the fortunes of the Conqueror were mostly of Gothic extraction, the descendants of the military order who vanquished the Romans. These admixtures of the Celt, the Phoenician, the Teuton, and the Roman, have left a mixed people. The various elements were destined in process of time to amalgamate and become a racial type; and the Anglo-Saxon has a composite character, in which are found the well-known characteristics of Englishmen. The features become marked, prominent, and distinct, or otherwise, according as the original racial types unite, amalgamate, or separate. These various races, which have conjoined to form the English nation, appear to have met in the midland districts, and as the baronial castles of Warwick and Kenilworth would be awarded to the followers of the Conqueror, to make them lords over "tower and town," they would attract numerous dependants in their train; these again would ultimately become blended with the Anglo-Saxon race, and will serve in some degree to explain the apparent anomalous facial contours seen in the Warwickshire people and their neighbours in the midland counties. The Mask said to be from the face of Shakspere does not possess the broad characteristics of the Warwickshire type. The majority of the people have the Anglo-Saxon or Teutonic physiognomy—a broad-set body, full face, long upper lip, straight or composite nose, hazel eyes, and auburn hair. There is, however, another though less numerous type, blending elements of the Norman with the Anglo-Saxon characteristics, where the aquiline feature in the nose unites with other traits in the long upper lip and fair complexion of the Teuton or Frisian race. These are the marked characteristics of the Jansen portrait, and the mask said to be taken from the face of Shakspere, and also belong to the portraits to which I have drawn attention as likenesses of the family of Shakspere, and which formerly belonged on one side to the Harts, and on the other to the Hathaways. (To be continued.) London: FRED. PITMAN, 20, Paternoster Row, E.C. Printed by J. WARD, Dewsbury. Popular Lecturer and Reader. Edited by HENRY PITMAN, Manchester. No. 20. New AUGUST, 1864. 2d. POETRY AND RELIGIOUS FEELING, ILLUSTRATED BY THE WRITINGS OF BYRON AND SHELLEY. BY THE REV. F. W. KITTERMASTER, M. A. [Continued from the close of Vol. 8, 1863.] HAVE spoken so much of Byron that I have but little time left for Shelley. I may refer you, however, to his comparison of Sleep and Death, and his description of Night, both in "Queen Mab." How wonderful is Death, Death and his brother Sleep! One, pale as yonder waning moon, The other, rosy as the morn When thron'd on ocean's wave, It blushes o'er the world: Yet both so passing wonderful!" How beautiful this night! the balmiest sigh Were discord to the speaking quietude That wraps this moveless scene. Heaven's ebon vault, Through which the moon's unclouded grandeur rolls, Seems like a canopy which love has spread To curtain her sleeping world. Yon gentle hills, Yon darksome rocks, whence icicles depend, |