This is a matter of some debate. A number of paintings have been put forward as paintings made of Shakespeare from life, but none of them is clearly genuine. The Chandos portrait, done in 1610 by John Taylor, has the best claim to legitimacy. The Sanders portrait is labeled as a portrait of Shakespeare and is dated 1603, and also is claimed to be connected with someone who knew Shakespeare. The contention about the Sanders has centred around the label, which some have claimed to be anachronistic, but which has been scientifically tested for age and is indeed from Shakespeare's lifetime. The Cobbe Portrait, which was recently touted as a portrait of Shakespeare by Stanley Wells, has a really dubious title based on the facts that it might have belonged to someone who knew Shakespeare and that someone once copied it and tried to pass it off fraudulently as a genuine portrait. It is only in the last decade that anyone claimed that the Cobbe was a portrait of Shakespeare. The National Gallery has rejected its claim.
The only images of Shakespeare which we can be sure of are not paintings at all but the engraving by Droushout at the beginning of the First Folio, and the statue in Shakespeare's monument in the church in Stratford.
"Romeo and Juliet" is a play by William Shakespeare, written about 400 years ago; it is not a painting.
No, William Shakespeare was a Caucasian/White English man. This is shown in portraits, and verbal and written descriptions of him. AnswerAs Shakespeare did not come from a noble background no portraits or pictures of him, or any members of his family, were commissioned. Neither is there any evidence that Shakespeare commissioned his own portrait or pictures in his later, prosperous years. There is no evidence that a portrait or pictures were ever painted of him while he was alive, nor is there any written description of his physical appearance. Therefore, pictures and physical descriptions of him were made up at the makers' discretion. These makers were undoubtedly white. However, only a very extensive research would possibly unveil who the real Shakespeare was as far as physical appearance. ------ However, his background seems to indicate he was caucasian. There is no evidence provided to show anything but an Anglo-saxon heritage.
There are no fully documented portraits of Shakespeare painted when he was alive. The best-attested image of him is the Droushout engraving, which appears in the First Folio. Its accuracy as an image of Shakespeare is attested to by many people who knew him. This is the best-known image of Shakespeare. There is also the monument in the church at Stratford, which was paid for and approved by Shakespeare's wife and children as an accurate portrait. It is quite similar to the Droushout. They both show a man with male pattern baldness, a small beard and moustache (unusually small in an era where full pointed beards were the style) and a broad forehead. The best-authenticated painting of Shakespeare is called the Chandos portrait. Even this is not considered to be properly attested, although it is a popular image. Every few years someone claims that this painting or that is really a painting of Shakespeare made from life. The evidence for these claims is usually quite scanty, but it makes for a good news story.
1593 Theatres close due to the Bubonic Plague (The Black Death).
No one really knows the answer. They painted a portrait of him after he died. They just guessed his appearence.This is one of the photocopys.
Rembrandt painted portraits, van Gogh painted over sixty self portraits.
Van Gogh is famous for his multiple self-portraits, painted over the course of his lifetime. The most famous were painted between 1887 and 1889.
No, it was not.
As part of record keeping
Hans Holbein the younger traveled around painting portraits.
She painted many landscapes. Practically no portraits.
"Romeo and Juliet" is a play by William Shakespeare, written about 400 years ago; it is not a painting.
If you mean Rembrandt, he painted or drew about 30 self-portraits.
They had their portraits painted.
Rembrant
Holbein
No, William Shakespeare was a Caucasian/White English man. This is shown in portraits, and verbal and written descriptions of him. AnswerAs Shakespeare did not come from a noble background no portraits or pictures of him, or any members of his family, were commissioned. Neither is there any evidence that Shakespeare commissioned his own portrait or pictures in his later, prosperous years. There is no evidence that a portrait or pictures were ever painted of him while he was alive, nor is there any written description of his physical appearance. Therefore, pictures and physical descriptions of him were made up at the makers' discretion. These makers were undoubtedly white. However, only a very extensive research would possibly unveil who the real Shakespeare was as far as physical appearance. ------ However, his background seems to indicate he was caucasian. There is no evidence provided to show anything but an Anglo-saxon heritage.