Nov. 3. 1855.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



339 



PHOTOGRAPHIC PORTRAITS OF SHAKSPEARE. 



I liave never been satisfied with any of the so- 

 called portraits of Shakspeare; even that of most 

 pretensions, the Chandos portrait, now Lord El- 

 lesmere's (of which I have a drawing by Richard- 

 son, before the picture was ruined by cleaning and 

 repainting), is so dissimilar to the bust and Martin 

 Droeshout's print, that it cannot have been a 

 representation of the same person. 



The monumental bust has ever been, in my 

 mind, the only likeness to be relied on ; and to 

 this the print by Droeshout prefixed to the first 

 folio has sufficient resemblance, that, allowing for 

 possible deviations of the engraver from the pic- 

 ture he copied, it claims the second place. 



Feeling that we have never had a faithful de- 

 lineation of the bust, notwithstanding^ the many 

 engravings that have been made of it, both on 

 copper and on Avood, and possessing an excellent 

 cast from it, I availed myself of a visit from 

 Mr. Robert Howlett, of the Photographic Institu- 

 tion, to get a negative photograph from it, of which 

 I have the pleasure of sending you an impression, 

 ivnd doubt not you will agree with me, that it has 

 never before been properly represented. I have 

 since myself taken some small positive photographs 

 on glass of the bust in profile, which are charm- 

 ingly expressive, and were I to choose a repre- 

 sentation of the poet to accompany any edition of 

 his works, I would certainly content myself with 

 a photogra[)h of the bust, seen either in profile or 

 three-quarter face. To these it might be allow- 

 able to add a photographic copy of Droeshout's 

 print, which has never been faithfully copied ; for 

 even the reduced copy in Mr. Collier's edition of 

 Shakspeare, though well engraved, fails in the 

 essential point of resemblance. Steevens has justly 

 remarked that, 



" Few objects are more diflicult to seize than the slender 

 traits that mark the character of a face; and the ej-e 

 will often detect the want of them, when the most exact 

 mechanical process cannot decide on the places in which 

 they are omitted." 



Should you or any of your readers wish to see 

 a true representation of what I consider to be the 

 only authentic portrait of the poet, they will find 

 photographs from the bust of two or three sizes, 

 at the Photographic Institution in New Bond 

 Street. S. W. Singer. 



Mickleham. 



NAMES AND PICTS. 



At a lecture on names, delivered lately in this 

 neighbourhood to a Literary Society (a report on 

 which was given in the provincial newspapers), it 

 was stated by the lecturer, that the word name 

 derives from the Latin nomen. No authority for 

 this assertion appears to have been quoted. 



No. 314.] 



Now, although we have in our language nume- 

 rous derivatives from both Greek and Latin, would 

 it not be more legitimate to go back on our own 

 paternal stem of the Indo-European group for an 

 etymon, than to seek it on a sister stem ? 



Name certainly resembles nomen, inasmuch as 

 both begin with an n, but the radical syllables 

 differ ; whereas, in our parent language, the Anglo- 

 Saxon, we have nama, a name ; naman, or neiiinan, 

 to name. In German, Name; Dan.navn; Iceland. 

 nafri; Swed. namri; Old High Ger. numo; and 

 Gothic, namo, a name ; namnyan, to name. 



On other stems of the Indo-European group, 

 we find Sanscrit, nama or namma; Bengalee, 

 namma; Hindu, nama; Persian, nam or numah; 

 Celt. -Irish, nimb. 



Something similar occurs elsewhere; for ex- 

 ample: Hebrew, naam ; Finnish, nimi ; Osliak, 

 nemen ; and Alban. nam. In the Malabar also, 

 naman seems to have the same meaning. If it be 

 conceded that Sanscrit is the parent of the whole 

 group, instead of being only an individual stem, 

 then we may presume the Latin nomen, and Greek 

 onoma, derive from nom and nomme, which also 

 appear in the Sanscrit. In Wallachian, a lan- 

 guage of classical origin, is neme, a name. Here 

 then is a case, most deferentially submitted for 

 the consideration of the numerous learned corre- 

 spondents of '• N. & Q." 



The foregoing brings to my recollection another 

 etymological case, that occurred here a few years 

 ago, touching on the question, "Who were the 

 Picts?" It was a lecture on the primitive inha- 

 bitants of Britain. I quote from the report in 

 a provincial newspaper. Incidentally, the lec- 

 turer told his audience, that the word coward is 

 derived from "cow-herd" — a name given in de- 

 rision to the dastardly Britons (who were great 

 cow-keepers) by their Pictish invaders. 



Who the Picts were, what language they spoke, 

 was, as most people know, a subject of h»ng and 

 bitter dispute. Only lately, as it were. Dr. 

 Prichard, after a careful investigation of every 

 available authority, declared, that '_' there are no 

 remains of literature, not even a single sentence, 

 and scarcely an ascertained word, preserved as a 

 specimen of the language of the Picts." (Phys. 

 Hist., S)-c., vol. iii. p. 164.) 



But the veil is raised ; what that language was 

 we now know — we have it ex cathedra. A. C. M. 



Exeter. 



ORIGIN OP " Blackwood's magazine." 



At this time, when the Nodes of Blackwood are 

 being republished, and creating a strong literary 

 sensation, the accompanying letter to me (some- 

 where between 1820 and 1825) may be thought 

 interesting by your readers. I need not remind 



