Question about historical accuracy

I know it's based on Shakespeare's plays, but am wondering if the characters and events are historically accurate.

No, they're not. Shakespeare's primary historical reference was Holinshed's Chronicles. The Chronicles themselves are full of inaccuracies, plus Shakespeare deviated from them whenever the story required.

In the case of Richard III, his primary source was Thomas More's "History of Richard III". More worked for Henry VII and, later, Henry VIII, so he was hardly unbiased. His "history" has been widely refuted by modern historians. For an easy read on the subject, check out Josephine Tey's mystery novel, "The Daughter of Time". If you want something more substantial, I'd suggest "Richard the Third" by the late OSU historian Paul Murray Kendall.

In a nutshell, Shakespeare was a dramatist, not a historian.


https://rycardus.wordpress.com/2016/11/02/sherlock-and-the-sorcerer/

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I asked the same question four years ago on the Henry V board, JaneCat. You may be interested in the replies:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2150275/board/thread/202114740?d=202114740#202114740






If there aren't any skeletons in a man's closet, there's probably a Bertha in his attic.

reply share

add reply

formatting help