Shakespeare's Portrayal of English History: Accuracy vs. Artistic License

When considering the accuracy of Shakespeare's portrayal of English history, it is essential to understand the nature of storytelling and how it differs from the presentation of factual history. Shakespeare, as a master storyteller, blended factual accounts with dramatic license, creating plays that, while not purely accurate, offer valuable insight into the cultural and political contexts of his time.

Understanding the Role of the Storyteller

No play, novel, or movie can accurately reflect historical reality, even when based on reliable accounts. Storytelling relies on creating a narrative that engages and entertains the audience, which often means taking liberties with historical facts. Unlike history texts, which aim to provide factual accounts with all their details and complexities, the primary goal of a storyteller is to create a compelling and dramatic narrative.

Shakespeare's Angle on Historical Accuracy

Shakespeare lived during the reign of Elizabeth I, a period of controlled content where the monarch heavily influenced what could be said about previous rulers. This control is evident in Shakespeare's portrayal of historical figures, such as Richard III. Richard's depiction as an evil character aligns with the Tudor bias towards Henry VII's victory in the battle of Bosworth Field. Similarly, the character of Macbeth is a significant departure from the historical figure, who was more of a king with complex motivations rather than the tragic character in Shakespeare's play.

Primary Sources and the Nature of Holinshed

Shakespeare primarily relied on Holinshed's Chronicles, first published in 1577, as his source for information about English history. This text served as the basis for his English chronicle plays and provided the foundation for the plots in plays like Macbeth, King Lear, and Cymbeline. However, Holinshed's Chronicles contains inaccuracies and biases, as it attempts to set a pattern for royal behavior and political ideals. The material often deviates from factual accounts and aligns with the government's narrative.

Historical Deviations and Creative License

The plays that are based on these chronicle histories often follow the broad outlines of the facts but incorporate significant creative liberties. For instance, Falstaff in Henry IV, Part 1 and Part 2 may be loosely based on Sir John Oldcastle, but the character as portrayed in Shakespeare's plays is a fictional construct. The character of Hotspur in the same plays is dramatically altered, with his age and career trajectory significantly changed from historical records. In the case of Macbeth, Shakespeare takes pieces from Holinshed's Chronicles without claiming any historical accuracy.

Art and Interpretation in Shakespearean Plays

Shakespeare's plays should not be considered historical fact but rather as a form of art. While the early chronicle histories served as a primary source, the playwright frequently departed from these sources to create a more engaging and dramatic narrative. It is essential to consider that these plays were created for entertainment and artistic expression, not as historical accounts. For example, King Lear and Macbeth are tragedies based loosely on historical and literary documents, with substantial departures from their historical counterparts.

Conclusion: Learning English History from Shakespeare's Plays

While Shakespeare's plays offer valuable insights into the cultural and political contexts of his time, they should not be relied upon as a primary source for historical accuracy. If you are interested in learning about English history, it is advisable to begin with factual historical sources. However, understanding the play as a work of art and dramatic license allows you to appreciate its significance in shaping public perception and cultural understanding of the past.