Shakespeare's English Kings: History, Chronicle, and Drama

by Peter Saccio

Far more than any professional historian, Shakespeare is responsible for whatever notions most of us possess about English medieval history. Anyone who appreciates the dramatic action of Shakespeare's history plays but is confused by much of the historical detail will welcome this guide to the Richards, Edwards, Henrys, Warwicks and Norfolks who ruled and fought across Shakespeare's page and stage. Not only theater-goers and students, but today's film-goers who want to enrich their understanding of film adaptations of plays such as Richard III and Henry V will find this revised edition of Shakespeare's English Kings to be an essential companion.

Saccio's engaging narrative weaves together three threads: medieval English history according to the Tudor chroniclers who provided Shakespeare with his material, that history as understood by modern scholars, and the action of the plays themselves. Including a new preface, a revised further reading list, genealogical charts, an appendix of names and titles, and an index, the second edition of Shakespeare's English Kings offers excellent background reading for all of the ten history plays.

Genres: Shakespeare, History, Nonfiction, Literary Criticism, Drama, British Literature, Plays

284 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1977

About the author

Ph.D., Princeton University
Dartmouth College

Dr. Peter Saccio is Leon D. Black Professor of Shakespearean Studies and Professor of English Emeritus at Dartmouth College. He also served as a visiting professor at Wesleyan University and at University College in London. He earned his Ph.D. from Princeton University.

At Dartmouth, Professor Saccio was honored with the J. Kenneth Huntington Memorial Award for Outstanding Teaching.

Professor Saccio is the author of Shakespeare’s English Kings, which has become a classic in its field. He is also the editor of Thomas Middleton’s comedy A Mad World, My Masters, for the Oxford Complete Works of Thomas Middleton.

Professor Saccio is also an accomplished actor and theatrical director. He directed productions of Twelfth Night, Macbeth, and Cymbeline, and devised and directed several programs of scenes from Shakespeare and from modern British drama. His acting credits include the Shakespearean roles of Casca, Angelo, Bassanio, and Henry IV, as well as various parts in the ancient and modern plays.

Reviews

[Sasha · Rating 4 out of 5]

My summer project was to read each of Shakespeare's ten history plays along with their respective chapters in this book. I failed, in that I just couldn't be assed to read King John. Screw that play, I hear it sucks. It doesn't even talk about the Magna Carta, wtf? (ETA: I eventually read it. It sucks.)

Anyway...the idea was to say hi to Shakespeare, and also to get a grasp on 15th-century English history. Saccio's book goes through the latter, alerting you when Shakespeare's being particularly accurate (Richard II) and when he's totally making shit up (Henry VI).

It also attempts to make sense of the bedlam of nobles who spend all ten plays jockeying with and betraying each other. That's a particularly tall order; anyone who's read one of Shakespeare's histories knows that there are several dozen Buckinghams, Gloucesters, etc. per play and you never have any idea what they're sucking up or bitching about. You skimmed the scenes featuring lots of nobles talking, didn't you? Of course you did. Everyone did.

Saccio does okay though. I found the book engaging, and I got a little more out of the plays because I more or less understood each player's position and back story.

I particularly appreciate what nerds call the Henriad - Richard II, Henry IV 1 & 2, and Henry V. It's not like a news flash that those are great, but they're great. I have even less love for Henry VI 1-3; those plays legitimately suck, with the sole exception that it's sortof fun reading Shakespeare's enthusiastically brutal character assassination of Joan of Arc. Richard III stands up and retains its position as one of my favorites. And no one should ever read Henry VIII.

So: dorktastic project, cool book; I had fun. I give it the thumbs up.

[Elsa Triin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read for the course 'Shakespeare's History Plays'.

It was an interesting read for sure. Saccio uses dry humour and sarcasm to present the reader the history of the actual kings and compare it to Shakespeare's rendition of them. Shakespeare was, after all, a Tudor writer and did his fair share of propaganda.

I think this book serves well as a companion to either the original plays or adaptions of them. Though Saccio elaborates on his points, without knowing the history nor the plays, the reader would feel lost. With a bit of knowledge, however, this book certainly enhances the experience.

[Joseph McGarry · Rating 5 out of 5]

I once had a high school English teacher describe Shakespeare's histories as "boring". Part of the reason for that is that it is easy to get lost in the murk of history. The events happened around 600 years ago, and seem like something out of a Renaissance Fair. This is what Dr Saccio's book works to explain. He very succinctly goes through the over 100 years of history discussed in the history plays, Henry IV parts 1&2, Henry V, Richard III, Henry VI parts 1-3. Richard II, King John, and Henry VIII. At times, it's hard to imagine how England could have survived. There were always questions over who was the legitimate heir to the throne, always battles over land, wars with France, arranged marriages, and bills of attainder prosecuting certain people for treason, many times on trumped-up charges. (This last part explains why the drafters of the US Constitution inserted a specific clause prohibiting bills of attainder.) Henry VIII also deals a bit with the Church of England's break with Rome. This is great material for any kind of dramatic play. Dr Saccio shows the differences between the actual history (as far as we know) and Shakespeare's version. Shakespeare occasionally telescopes events, has people present at certain locations who weren't actually there, and ages younger characters to be present for dramatic effect. In this, Shakespeare is no different than modern screenwriters, who will telescope events and composite characters to keep the movie under 2 hours. In Shakespeare's case, he was trying to show general themes--betrayal, murder, greed, incompetence--to show how the history evolved. The original book was written in 1977. Dr Saccio adds an Afterword, written in 2000, to explain the evolution of scholarship on Shakespeare since 1977.

Of the history plays, 3 seem to be the most widely performed today--1 Henry IV, Henry V, and Richard III. These are performed, not because of any history involved, but because of the characters. In 1 Henry IV, modern performers focus on the character of Falstaff, who, as Dr Saccio points out, is a Shakespearean invention. He is the "fat knight", and in many cases is portrayed as a buffoon. His famous line, "Discretion is the better part of valor," which he uses to explain his hiding out in the bar instead of taking part in the battle. (Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth I was so enthralled with Falstaff that she asked Shakespeare to write another play featuring him. The result was Merry Wives of Windsor.) Shakespeare's Henry V is almost the ideal king. I believe Shakespeare had the same view. I've seen modern business books cit Shakespeare's Henry V as a model of organizational leadership. One scene that isn't addressed in the book is the famous scene where King Henry disguises himself as a commoner and mingles among his troops the night before the battle at Agincourt. Was this a Shakespearean invention, or was there some historical basis for this? The book doesn't answer this question. I suspect that his "band of brothers" speech was all Shakespeare. The original motivational speech, predating "Win one for the Gipper" by 300 years. (As a Notre Dame graduate, I love that speech. GO IRISH!) Shakespeare's Richard III, by contrast, is the antithesis of what a king should be. He is the living embodiment of Machiavelli's Prince, always conniving and scheming to get the throne, until he falls at the battle of Bosworth. His famous line, "A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!" is Shakespeare's invention. So is the humpback and the crooked nose often used by those who portray Richard. As Dr Saccio points out, the real Richard wasn't all that bad, but wasn't all good either. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Henry VIII is a historical footnote. At the premiere of Henry VIII at the Globe Theater, one of the stagehands apparently got drunk and fired off a cannon, which burned the Globe Theater to the ground.

If you look at the current situation with England and France today, it's almost hard to believe things were any different. Today, the Chunnel connects England and France by rail under the English Channel. The 2014 Tour de France spent the first 3 days in England before moving to France. It received a royal opening by Prince William, Duchess Kate, and Prince Harry. Queen Elizabeth II has been on the throne for 62 years as of 2014 (1952-present), surpassed only by Queen Victoria's 64 years (1837-1901). In 2011, Parliament passed legislation removing the preference for boys to rule, and removing the prohibition on the King or Queen marrying a Catholic. You wonder if all of drama described in Dr Saccio's book was necessary. All in all, this is an excellent book for those who want to know more about Shakespeare's kings.

[alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this for a university course on Shakespeare's history plays.

The nature of the task Saccio sets himself in this book is simple: to compare the plays with their historical background and examine the differences between the two. He is not particularly concerned with interpreting the plays, but I didn't find this to be a negative. This book is a good starting point for those interested in getting into Shakespeare, particularly his history plays, which are often viewed as long and boring. Saccio's writing is accessible and enjoyable with the occasional dash of British dry humor (poor incompetent Henry VI).

Although Saccio gives a relatively comprehensive overview of the characters and plots involved, I do recommend reading the plays or at least summaries of them (bless SparkNotes) beforehand in order to better understand the differences between history and fiction (the addition of one unhistorical figure or another can be quite meaningless if you're largely unaware of their role in the play).

[Melinda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read again in 2019. Just excellent. Highly recommended!

**********************
2015 Review
After listening to The Teaching Company course by Peter Saccio, "The Word and the Action" (which is excellent, by the way), I looked for the book he referenced about the history of the Plantaganets thru the lens of Shakespeare's histories. Am looking forward to reading this!

*****************
Have read the book now, and really enjoyed it. The juxtaposition of the real history sources Shakespeare used with the real history of what happened, combined with the way Shakespeare has to craft the history for a successful dramatic play.... all adds up to a delightful excursion into how history is presented via the theater!

[Sandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very good book if you like Shakespeare (which I do) and actual real history (which I do). Much recommended on those grounds.

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Shakespeare wrote eight plays on the later Plantagenets. Incongruously, he did not put them in writing following a clear-cut chronological order.

He started with a tetralogy on the events from 1422 to 1485 — the three parts of Henry VI, Richard III — and then, dovetailing into the preceding work, composed a tetralogy whose narrative runs from 1398 to 1422 — Richard II, the two parts of Henry IV, Henry V.

Even though the plays fluctuate in excellence, the first set being a ‘prentice work’ compared to the second, and although the reverse-chronological order of writing proposes that he started with an unfinished vision of the whole, the series of eight has high coherence as a history of 15th century England.

Indeed, far more than any professional historian, and in the face of the fact that the professionals have improved upon him in historical accuracy, Shakespeare is accountable for whatever notions most of us hold about the period and its political leaders.

It is Shakespeare who has etched upon the common memory the elegant fecklessness of Richard II, the high-spirited heroism of Henry V, the astounding treachery of Richard III.

Regrettably, such central characterizations are often all that we hang on to, from Shakespeare’s history plays. Sometimes they are all a reader or playgoer ever resolutely grabs.

Not that Shakespeare neglected the elucidation of surrounding circumstances: the problem lies in his readers. The typical complexity of Elizabethan plays suggests that Elizabethan audiences were more accustomed to comprehending a large cast and a complicated plot than modern drama has trained us to be.

In the history plays, moreover, Shakespeare could rely upon a measure of former knowledge in his audience.

Aside from the double tetralogy, Shakespeare wrote two other plays on English history, one on King John (reigned 1199-1216) and one on Henry VIII (reigned 1509—1547). These are also reasonably convoluted works, and about these kings as well Shakespeare could expect at least some of his audience to be clued-up.

Since both of these plays are completely self-contained works, not part of a series employing cross-reference between plays, their potential for baffling the reader is somewhat smaller. They present a different version of the problem: moderns are surprised by the contents of the plays.

Nowadays if ordinary readers know anything at all about John before they take up the play, they know that his barons forced him to seal ‘Magna Carta’, an event that is held to be of great constitutional connotation in the history of English-speaking peoples. Shakespeare does not even allude to Magna Carta, although the play dramatizes the baronial revolt that led to it.

If ordinary readers know anything about Henry VIII, they know that he married six wives and brought about the English Reformation. There may also leap to mind the image of an unkind and disgusting king, versatile with the chopping block and coarse in his table manners. Shakespeare’s play, however, includes only two of the wives, deals scantily with the Reformation, and generally portrays the king with the greatest respect.

With these two kings, Shakespeare has had little influence upon the common memory. Constitutional struggles after Shakespeare’s time endowed Magna Carta with its present nearly sacred character, and the popular notion of Henry VIII owes a great deal to Holbein’s paintings, a television series, movies, and historical romances.

The book has been divided into nine sections:

I HISTORY AND HISTORY PLAYS

II RICHARD II: THE FALL OF THE KING
1. Richard’s reign to 1397
2. The Bolingbroke-Norfolk quarrel
3. The usurpation
4. The earl’s rebellion

III HENRY IV: THE KING EMBATTLED
1. The usurper and his challengers
2. The battle of Shrewsbury
3. Gaultree Forest and Bramham Moor
4. The king and the prince

IV HENRY V: THE KING VICTORIOUS
1. The English throne
2. The French throne

V HENRY VI: THE LOSS OF EMPIRE
1. Introduction to the Henry VI plays
2. The end of the Hundred Years War
3. History and I Henry IV

VI HENRY VI & EDWARD IV: THE RIVAL KINGS
1. The disorders of the 1440s
2. The fortunes of Richard duke of York
3. Edward IV, 1461-1471

VII RICHARD III: THE LAST PLANTAGENET
1. Edward IV, 1471-1483
2. The accession of Richard III
3. Bosworth and the Tudors

VIII JOHN: THE LEGITIMACY OF THE KING
1. The Angevin empire
2. The limits of royal authority
3. Usurped rights

IX HENRY VIII: THE SUPREME HEAD
1. Henry VIII and Henry VIII
2. Henry’s reign to 1529
3. The English Reformation

In the aforesaid chapters, the author distinguishes among various perspectives:

*First, there is a modern understanding of what happened in the 15th century, incomplete and full of questions though it be, built up by research historians.

*Secondly, there is a Tudor understanding. Henry VII commissioned an Italian humanist, Polydore Vergil, to write an official history of England. Vergil’s book is the foundation of a lively tradition of Tudor historiography, culminating in two works that were Shakespeare’s principal sources of information: Edward Hall’s The Union of the Two Noble and lllustre Families of Lancaster and York (1548) and Raphael Holinshed’s The Chronicles of England, Ireland, and Scot land (1578; Shakespeare used the second edition, 1587).

Basic to these Tudor accounts is a conviction in Henry VII as the redeemer of England. In part this belief sprang from the requirement to substantiate the Tudor attainment of the throne: Richard III, for example, is made more stunningly villainous than any man could possibly be, so that Tudor monarchy may appear the more sought-after.

In part the belief arose from the wide-spread 16th century belief that secular history displays patterns reflecting God’s providential guidance of human affairs.

Thus the deposition of Richard II is seen as a blasphemous act suspending the progression of God’s anointed kings, a kind of ‘original sin’ for which England and her rulers must suffer.

The Lancastrians are then punished for their usurpation by the Yorkists, and the Yorkists by their own last king, until, England having atoned in blood, redemption may come in the form of Henry Tudor and his union of the rival houses.

*Thirdly, there is a Shakespearean viewpoint. This is, naturally, still largely Tudor, since Shakespeare is writing during the reign of Henry’s grand-daughter, Queen Elizabeth, and drawing his material from Hall and Holinshed.

Nonetheless, despite their large areas of agreement, the Tudor chroniclers, poets, and playwrights who dealt with historical matters (there were many) were certainly capable of individual interpretations of men and events.

Shakespeare above all deviates from the received accounts because he is translating comparatively amorphous chronicles into drama, taking historical liberties out of artistic obligation.

Above all, Shakespeare personalizes. Whether or not history is in actuality governed by the characters and the options of individual men and women, the dramatist can only write as if it were. Social stipulations, cultural patterns, economic forces, justice and the lack of it, all that we mean by “the times,” must be translated into persons and passions if they are to hold the stage.

This book manages to profitably accomplish three purposes:

1) It is triumphant in acting as a ‘backdrop-reading’ for Shakespeare’s ten history plays. Only incidentally does it hint at criticism or the more definite predicaments of Shakespearean source-study: many brilliant books are available on the artistic quality and the implication of these plays.

2) It thrives in presenting a succinct, articulate explanation of English history in the reigns concerned, concentrating on the persons and the issues that Shakespeare dramatized.

3) The book succeeds in serving as an outstandingly unambiguous introduction and a constructive work of reference for the complicated story told by the Bard’s plays.

A must read for every student of Shakespeare. Grab a copy if you choose.

[Mac · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a Peter Saccio stan account.

Saccio is one of my favorite Shakespeare scholars, and this book does not disappoint. It gives a clear and concise account of the differences between history and the highly-dramatized stories that Shakespeare wrote. It’s not quite as funny as Saccio often is, but it’s also not as dry as history books often are.

I spent about ten years dipping into chapters as Shakespeare projects came up, before deciding this year to just read the whole thing cover to cover.

In the end, I think this is a book better read a chapter at a time as you work on producing or studying a history play. Even in the hands of someone like Saccio, the parade of Duke Edwards and Earl Henries can get a little mind-numbing after 150 years. There were definitely times that I just gave up trying to keep track.

FFO: Shakespeare, England, kings, dynastic struggles, invading France, being invaded by France.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Too often one's enjoyment of Shakespeare's History plays is muddied up by the fact that so much of the history is not taught in schools, and even when it is, it is not at the depth that one needs to get the full enjoyment from the plays. Peter Saccio has easily solved that problem with "Shakespeare's English Kings". This is a wonderful, erudite, concise, and easy to follow text that clears up the actual history behind Shakespeare's dramatizations. It also serves as an excellent guide to a period of English history that more and more people know less and less about.
Mr. Saccio has written a book that does not read as an academic text, but instead reads as a colloquial history lesson. This makes it more accessible, and is a great strength of the text. Another plus is the book's organization. After an intro that explains necessary background and other details, the book is arranged by monarch, with each king's reign getting a chapter. The text is arranged in historical order, starting with the reign of Richard II, as it is this play which Shakespeare uses to start the history cycle. Saccio then takes the reader up through the end of the Plantagenet line (I actually know what that means now) with Richard III. He also devotes a chapter to the two Shakespeare history plays that do not fall into the chronology, "King John" and "Henry VIII". The chapters examine the history as we know it, the history as Shakespeare knew it through his sources, differences between the two, and how the Bard incorporated the history he does use into his works.
Saccio himself tells the reader you can read the text all the way through as a coherent unified book (as I did) or you can read the chapter dealing with the play of Shakespeare's that you are interested in. He has written the book so that both approaches work.
This book will aid you in a greater appreciation of Shakespeare's oft maligned history plays. However, it also is worthwhile as a standalone history of the English monarchy, especially in regards to the very confusing story of the "War of the Roses". It is worth your efforts.

[Heidi Schmidt · Rating 5 out of 5]

So I've marked this as finished, which isn't strictly accurate. This book was recommended to me by a friend when I was hired as dramaturg (research assistant, for the non-theatre folk) for a production of Richard III. Saccio has dedicated chapters to each of Shakespeare's eight major history plays, comparing what was known/believed/written at the time Shakespeare wrote each play, what we now know about the actual history, and how Shakespeare put his own twist on things through dramatic license, time compression, etc. My reading focused on the introduction (one of the most lucid, easy to follow explanations of the Plantagenets and familial conflicts through the Wars of the Roses I've ever read), and the chapters on Henry VI (parts 1-3) and of course, the chapter on Richard III. I've joked that working on Shakespeare's history plays is like watching an intricate sci-fi TV show or movie with time travel and alternate timelines. Saccio does a great job delineating the multiple timelines (what Shakespeare wrote, what 16th century historians wrote, how later historians re-conceived the narrative, etc). I highly recommend this to anyone with an interest in Shakespeare's history plays, or for that matter, anyone with an interest in English medieval history and royal succession.

[Kleopatra · Rating 4 out of 5]

An amazingly useful tool for studying Shakespeare's history plays- lays a good historical foundation for people like me (more or less totally ignorant about early modern British history, especially all things royalty) and is as concise as I imagine it can possibly get with conveying this amount of information. Clearly has been edited carefully and well, and the result is some excellent, precise, concise, interesting, at times very witty, background reading for Shakespeare's history plays.
One tiny drawback- sometimes gets a bit too dense, I found. Had to take meticulous notes as I was reading, otherwise I could easily get lost in the amount of information I was trying to take in- but maybe this wouldn't be such a big issue for someone more well-read in English history!

[Don Heiman · Rating 5 out of 5]

After listening to Peter Saccio’s lectures on Shakespeare’s: The Word and the Action,” I purchased and read a copy of his 2000 second edition book “Shakespeare’s English Kings: History, Chronicle, and Drama.” This book compares Shakespeare’s kingship play storylines to the actual historic events that occurred. The differences give Shakespeare fans wonderful insights into how his plays version, enhance, and nuance the social focus of the 15th and 16th centuries. I especially like Soccio’s genealogical charts, historic timeline of events from 1066 to 1616, and historic source bibliographies. His afterword is captioned “literary criticism and historical scholarship since 1977.” The afterword is exceptional. (P)

[Anthony Bracciante · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book explores the very complicated history of the English Kings and the nobility that populate the so called histories of William Shakespeare. It discusses in detail how for dramatic purposes the bard of Avon often combined characters, changed the order that events occurred in and had his characters appear on stage long after their historic death or as adults when they were really still in their infancy. I read this book straight through but it really should be read on a King by King basis prior to either seeing or reading one of Shakespeare's plays which is how I will use it in the future.

[Jay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Exceptionally well written book about the English kings that were part of Shakespeare's history plays. In fine detail the author differentiates the actual historical events versus what Shakespeare uses in his play. He shows how many of the events do not fit into a tight dramatic plotline as Shakespeare would like us to believe but are at times displaced or irreverent to actual history.

[Abel Guerrero · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was excellent: well written, objective and thought provoking. It provides an accessible summary of the history surrounding each of the kings in the history plays, with some comparison to how the plays were crafted. Anyone who is interested in the history, or who just wants grounding in what's going on and why in the plays, will find it useful.

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. Fun book about the actual history of the kings featured in Shakespeare’s history plays, and how Shakespeare shaped history (or departed from it entirely) in creating his plays. It was published in 1977, so it would be interesting to see what researchers and historians have discovered or learned since then.

[Harry · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've been reading this on and off whilst doing an assignment about Shakespeare's Henriad. It's a good companion piece to the history plays and achieves exactly what the book set out to do. Furthermore, it's an interesting read in Monarchical history that manages to weave Shakespeare's narrative, however contradictory in historical accuracy, with the actual history of the English kings very well.

[Nate · Rating 4 out of 5]

For the Shakespeare fanatic. I just wanted to know how closely the 10 history plays were to what we actually know (or think we know) about these historical kings. It does a good job of showing that without becoming too tedious.

[Megan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nicely encapsulates the history and the plays. I could have used just a little more analysis of how/why Shakespeare changed the history for the sake of drama, but as the author says, that wasn't the focus of the book.

[Gabe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting and informative!

[Tia Seymour · Rating 5 out of 5]

An older, but a very useful and comprhensive historical account of the Kings who inspired Shakespeare's histories and his interpretations of thier reigns.

[CJ Dawn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great companion to read alongside the history plays this past year. Saccio offers a concise look at the real history compared to Shakepeare's history.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Decent, readable summary of the kings

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well-written and well-researched, this is an excellent book to read before seeing the history plays.

[Billhotto · Rating 3 out of 5]

Compares the now accepted historical facts about the 15th century English monarchy ( also chapters on "King John" and "Henry VIII) with Shakespeare's description of events and characters in his history plays. They only occasionally line up. Shakespeare relied on histories of the previous century written by Tudor historians like Polydore Virgil, Thomas More and Ralph Hollingshead. These were incomplete and biased. Shakespeare also played to his audience who, although familiar with this material, had their own contemporary prejudices and interests. In dramatizing historical events, Shakespeare had to foreshorten events, consolidate characters, change chronologies, invent fictional characters and scenes, all to make a more satisfying narrative. Even in factual history, there is the danger of writing as though people acted with knowledge of the future and that their actions led to an inevitable conclusion. For Shakespeare this unraveling of historical thread was the whole point. He had two over arching themes: questions of what constitutes good government and the importance of legitimacy. He begins with the original sin of Henry IV's 1398 usurping of the throne in "Richard II" and ends with the 1485 demise of the tainted Plantagenet line in "Richard III".
While not to be viewed as historical documents, as for many they are, Shakespeare reveals a more universal truth. What was a petty if vicous power struggle among the English nobility is transformed into a compelling meditation on leadership, responsibility and government.

[Mina · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an accessible read that goes further in depth about the history of Shakespeare's English Kings. Saccio analyzes where Shakespeare departs from and enriches the history behind his royal protagonists' stories. It will help you keep track of your various Henrys, Richards and Edwards, your Plantagenets and your Tudors. I like how Saccio compacts Enlish history (it's a thin book) and conjectures about the political reasons that informed Shakespeare's artistic decisions. Sidenote: I think history is really interesting yet scholarly writings about history tend to be really dry and dull. THIS won't bore you to tears!

[Warreni · Rating 3 out of 5]

It does an admirable job of trying to elucidate a murky subject

Saccio points out the major differences between Shakespeare's history of England and what we know to be true today. As one might expect, the Bard carefully chose from what his sources Hall and Holinshed reported in order to achieve the biggest dramatic bang for his buck. Saccio also notes where subsequent evidence reveals mistakes in Shakespeare's sources. I haven't rated the book higher mostly because it's still tough to disentangle this jumble of names and titles. Nevertheless, if you have any interest in the subject, it's a great introduction to the early English monarchy.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

I often try to read two books at the same time on a subject or related subjects. I find that the double perspective helps the learning process. In some instances, each book complements the other. In other instances, one book clearly does a better job. Here, Peter Saccio succeeds in producing a much more readable and effective study of the historical background to Shakespeare's history plays than did Lord Norwich in his version that I reviewed recently. If you only have time for one, chose this one.

[Eric · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great resource for readers of Shakespeare's history plays. This book recounts the history behind the monarchs, as it is known to the historical record. In addition, the plays are then tied into the history, making note of concordances and discrepancies between the two. A great resource, and almost required reading in terms of understanding Richard II, and several of the other history plays.

[Phoebe · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book, It's not for the casual reader, though. It chronicles the kings Shakespeare wrote about, and requires an in-depth familiarity with the plays. Shax, of course, took some liberties, especially with time-lines. That said, if you enjoy the histories, it's fun to see how it is manipulated for public consumption.