Shakespeare's Kings

PUBLISHERS WEEKLY 28 FEB 2000

This is a painstakingly sensible book, suitable for die-hard Shakespeare lovers. The author of the massive, three-part Byzantium turns here to the equally byzantine world of late medieval England, providing a complex context for the bard's nine Histories (including the recently authenticated Edward III) and asking: How accurate were Shakespeare's royal portraits? The canvas stretches from the Hundred Years War to the end of the Wars of the Roses. Norwich, structuring his book as political narrative, helpfully fills in gaps between the action of the plays. The book will be useful as a historical primer for those already familiar with the plays (or films: many will associate Henry V with Kenneth Branagh, or Richard III with Ian McKellen), but it lacks intellectual muscle, and the awkwardly intermittent analyses of accuracy obscure the natural flair of the author's prose. Norwich is conscientious in reconstructing detail, but his larger claims are meager. We learn, for instance, that Shakespeare has a "cavalier approach to chronology" and that his portraits sometimes fall prey to personal prejudice, but that with the great exception of Richard III (already vilified by Thomas More), the bold historical outlines are generally on the money. In his epilogue, the author briefly places the Histories against the backdrop of new Elizabethan self-confidence: England, "the only possible hero" in this long, sordid drama, craved the telling of its tale in the most accessible literary form of the day. Yet the elusive intellectual prey--the making of national identity--escapes through the thickets of history.