HistoryExtra Home of Britain’s bestselling history magazine and award-winning podcast 2026-09-30T08:11:11.000Z https://www.historyextra.com/period/elizabethan/feed/atom Rachel Dinning <![CDATA[Was Elizabeth I's reign really a 'golden age'?]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/elizazbeth-i-reign-golden-age-podcast/ 2026-09-30T08:11:11.000Z 2026-09-30T08:11:11.000Z As Elizabeth I entered the final chapter of her reign, questions of ageing, succession, and legacy loomed large.
In this final episode of our four-part Sunday Series on the Tudor monarch, Rachel Dinning is joined by historian Nicola Tallis to explore the queen’s later years, her reluctance to name an heir, and the political uncertainty that followed her death. They also examine how Elizabeth’s image was carefully crafted in her lifetime and beyond, helping to transform her into the enduring symbol of the ‘Golden Age’ that still captivates popular imagination today.
Watch now, or listen ad-free below:
View Green Video on the source website
Want to know more about Elizabeth I and her remarkable reign? Rachel Dinning rounds up essential reading from the HistoryExtra archive that explores Elizabeth's early life, rise to power, court intrigues, and the legacy that made her one of history's most iconic monarchs. Go beyond the podcast.
]]> Rachel Dinning <![CDATA[Elizabeth’s enemies: plots, rivals and the Spanish Armada]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/elizabeth-i-enemies-podcast/ 2026-09-23T08:11:06.000Z 2026-09-23T08:11:06.000Z Elizabeth I’s reign was defined by constant threat, both at home and abroad.
In this third episode of our four-part Sunday Series on the Tudor monarch, Rachel Dinning is joined by historian Nicola Tallis to examine the rivals and conspiracies that endangered the queen's security on the throne.
From the long and fraught conflict with her cousin Mary, Queen of Scots to the intricate spy networks that uncovered treasonous plots, they chart the mounting tensions that culminated in one of the most famous maritime perils England ever faced: the Spanish Armada of 1588.
Watch now or listen ad-free below:
View Green Video on the source website
Want to know more about Elizabeth I and her remarkable reign? Rachel Dinning rounds up essential reading from the HistoryExtra archive that explores Elizabeth's early life, rise to power, court intrigues, and the legacy that made her one of history's most iconic monarchs. Go beyond the podcast.
]]> Rachel Dinning <![CDATA[Elizabeth I: a woman in a man’s world]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/elizabeth-i-episode-two/ 2026-09-16T08:00:13.000Z 2026-09-16T08:00:12.000Z By 1559, Elizabeth I had secured the crown – but holding on to power would prove far more challenging. In this second episode of our four-part Sunday Series on the Tudor monarch, Rachel Dinning is joined by historian Nicola Tallis to explore Elizabeth’s early reign, from her coronation and the urgent task of stabilising a divided kingdom to the pressures of ruling as a female monarch in a deeply patriarchal society.
They also examine the influential figures who shaped her court and the high-stakes marriage negotiations that helped forge the enduring image of the ‘Virgin Queen’.
Watch now, or listen ad-free below:
View Green Video on the source website
Want to know more about Elizabeth I and her remarkable reign? Rachel Dinning rounds up essential reading from the HistoryExtra archive that explores Elizabeth's early life, rise to power, court intrigues, and the legacy that made her one of history's most iconic monarchs. Go beyond the podcast.
]]> Rachel Dinning <![CDATA[Young Elizabeth I: the making of a queen]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/elizabeth-i-episode-one/ 2026-09-09T08:00:13.000Z 2026-09-09T08:00:13.000Z Elizabeth I is one of history's most iconic monarchs, but her path to the throne was anything but secure.
In this first episode of our four-part Sunday Series on the 16th-century royal, Rachel Dinning is joined by historian Nicola Tallis to explore Elizabeth’s turbulent early years – from the execution of her mother, Anne Boleyn, to the political and personal dangers she faced as she navigated childhood, illegitimacy, and the treacherous Tudor succession. Together, they uncover how these formative experiences helped shape the woman who would become a formidable queen.
Watch now or listen ad-free, below:
View Green Video on the source website
Want to know more about Elizabeth I and her remarkable reign? Rachel Dinning rounds up essential reading from the HistoryExtra archive that explores Elizabeth's early life, rise to power, and the legacy that made her one of England’s most iconic monarchs. Go beyond the podcast.
]]> Mike Soutar <![CDATA[Winston Churchill: How to use dynamism to beat the odds]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/winston-churchill-how-to-use-dynamism-to-beat-the-odds/ 2026-07-27T14:42:30.000Z 2026-07-27T14:42:30.000Z Britain's Second World War prime minister was an inspiring visionary who's often credited with saving western democracy through sheer force of will. Yet Churchill is also a man whose dogged determination, and uncompromising leadership style, could lead to tension and conflict.
In this episode, historian, author and TV producer Taylor Downing – whose books include The Army that Never Was: D-Day and the Great Deception – tells Mike Soutar about the pros and cons of Churchill's high-intensity approach to management, and considers whether his leadership skills would stand up today's boardroom.
Watch below or listen to the full interview, ad-free:
View Green Video on the source website
For more on the life and legacy of Winston Churchill, don’t miss our curated collection of articles, podcasts and videos
]]> Spencer Mizen <![CDATA[Bess of Hardwick: life of the week]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/bess-of-hardwick-life-of-the-week-podcast/ 2026-07-21T15:28:30.000Z 2026-07-21T15:28:30.000Z Bess of Hardwick fell out spectacularly with Mary, Queen of Scots and was dumped in the Tower of London by Elizabeth I. Yet nothing could get in the way of this extraordinary social climber.
In this episode, Tracy Borman tells Spencer Mizen about a woman who accrued vast wealth, repeatedly rattled the Tudor court and ultimately earned the grudging respect of the Virgin Queen.
]]> Mike Soutar <![CDATA[Elizabeth I: The power of delaying decisions]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/elizabeth-i-historys-greatest-leaders-podcast/ 2026-07-20T09:32:47.000Z 2026-07-20T09:09:47.000Z We often think of successful leadership in terms of steely resolve and decisive action. And one of history’s most famous rulers, Tudor queen Elizabeth I, was certainly capable of this strength and dynamism. But there’s another side to her story, too: a recurring tendency towards procrastination and indecision.
In this episode, Tracy Borman – chief historian at Historic Royal Palaces and the author of books including Anne Boleyn & Elizabeth I: The Revelatory True Story of the Mother and Daughter who Changed History – tells Mike Soutar why this apparent dithering may in fact have been a strategic masterstroke, and highlights the tips that the queen’s reign has to offer leaders today.
Watch below or listen to the full interview, ad-free:
View Green Video on the source website
For more on the life and legacy of Elizabeth I, don’t miss our curated collection of articles, podcasts and videos
]]> Piers Mucklejohn <![CDATA[Was Shakespeare a secret political radical? One play's hidden symbols reveal the truth]]> https://www.historyextra.com/membership/was-shakespeare-a-secret-political-radical/ 2026-07-09T12:01:46.000Z 2026-07-09T12:01:46.000Z When the budding playwright William Shakespeare arrived in London around 1590, he was stepping into a theatrical world which was exciting, experimental – and incredibly dangerous.
The Tudor authorities operated a brutal regime of censorship designed to stamp out political disobedience, supported by spies, violent interrogation and torture.
Queen Elizabeth I – a monarch who employed her own spymasters – was particularly anxious about the potential power of plays, which drew thousands of spectators to the city’s playhouses and could influence ambitious courtiers during performances at the royal court. Many went on to become printed bestsellers.
- Read more | Elizabeth I’s shadowy spy network was tasked with uncovering secret conspiracies. Here’s what it found
She ordered that all dramatic performances be approved by the Master of the Revels before they could be staged. Any material questioning the Crown’s political authority or its religious agenda would be strongly repressed. This did not prevent political ideas from reaching the stage, but it forced playwrights to communicate indirectly, through historical parallels, allegory and double entendre.
Playwrights who flouted this censorship were arrested, interrogated, fined and sometimes imprisoned. Ben Jonson, for example, was locked up in 1597 and all copies of his “slanderous” play The Isle of Dogs were destroyed, while co-writer Thomas Nashe had his home raided.
Scholars have long believed that Shakespeare disguised his criticisms of the Elizabethan court by setting many of his plays in foreign countries, where he was free to critique courtiers and even monarchs.
But new research argues that the Bard was a daring political rebel who used one of his most famous plays to express support for a radical court faction shortly before it mounted a rebellion against the Queen.
Shakespeare’s As You Like It and the Essex Rebellion
Shakespeare experts Dr Chris Laoutaris and Dr Yasmin Arshad have uncovered cryptic ties between a mysterious portrait, Shakespeare’s comedy As You Like It and Robert Devereux, the Earl of Essex – a disgraced nobleman who led an unsuccessful rebellion against Elizabeth in 1601 and was subsequently beheaded.
These connections suggest not only that the playwright may have been sympathetic to the Earl, but that Essex’s supporters saw Shakespeare and his acting company, the Lord Chamberlain’s Men, as allies who could help them launch a popular revolt against the Crown.
In one scene in Shakespeare’s As You Like It, written in 1599, the sight of a wounded stag – languishing and “weeping” at the edge of a stream – greatly upsets a character.
The arrow-struck animal is described as “innocent” and a herd of deer that refuse to help it are criticised as “greasy citizens”.
On its own, the episode can be read as a broader satire on human selfishness. Laoutaris and Arshad argue, however, that contemporary audiences may also have recognised a more specific political reference. They suggest this expression of pity for a mistreated animal was a coded message of support for the Earl of Essex, who would go on to lead his doomed uprising only two years later.
This could also explain why As You Like It was temporarily banned from being printed in 1600, an act of censorship which historians have long puzzled over.
And it would suggest Shakespeare held dangerous political allegiances for which others had been imprisoned or even lost their heads.
The key clue is a portrait known as the Persian Lady, painted in the 1590s by Tudor court artist Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger. It depicts a woman dressed in opulent, oriental clothing, who is crowning a teary-eyed stag with a garland of pansies.
A riddling sonnet below laments the sitter’s “restless mind”, musing that “With pensive thoughts my weeping stag I crown/whose melancholy tears my cares express”.
Laoutaris and Arshad have pinpointed Lady Penelope Rich as the glamorous woman, whose identity has baffled art historians for centuries.
The poetic verses, they say, allude to another Penelope: Odysseus’ wife from The Odyssey, whose mind is also presented as restless – and to whom the beautiful Lady Rich was often compared by the many poets, artists and musicians she inspired. The Earl of Essex was Lady Rich’s brother. A dashing courtier, he was once a cherished favourite of the aging Elizabeth.
In their new study, published in the Times Literary Supplement, the researchers point out that Essex’s coat of arms featured a stag, meaning he may be the weeping deer Lady Rich is comforting in the portrait.
The portrait and the play emerged as Essex’s relationship with the Queen was deteriorating, although the full rebellion still lay ahead. At the time of the portrait’s composition, Essex was disgraced and under arrest for agreeing an unauthorised truce with rebels in Ireland, whose uprising he had been unable to put down by force, before illegally returning to England. This caused a rift between the leading courtly factions.
To support their cause, Essex’s supporters had circulated scandalous libels accusing his enemies at court of corruption, which the researchers say also alluded to the image of a stag.
Is everything we thought we knew about Shakespeare’s politics wrong?
If this research is correct that Shakespeare’s “weeping” stag was a message of support for the controversial Earl, it could upend academics’ view of the Bard’s willingness to publicly take political sides.
“The stag in As You Like It could only have been regarded with suspicion by the Elizabethan censors,” explains Laoutaris of the University of Birmingham’s Shakespeare Institute, who says it accompanied “an avalanche of libels from Essex’s supporters, as well as from Essex and Lady Rich themselves”.
The description of Shakespeare’s deer as a “poor and broken bankrupt” reflected Essex’s precarious finances. Even after being liberated in August 1600, he was stripped of his public offices and never regained his lucrative sweet wine monopoly.
Laoutaris adds that the animal is described as “sequestered”, which could be a reference to Essex’s arrest, and was also the term for the legal process by which someone’s “land and property were forcibly confiscated after engaging in illegal or subversive activity”.
The argument becomes more consequential when the play is considered alongside a better-known encounter between Essex’s followers and Shakespeare’s company, with the findings shedding new light on the Essex faction’s decision to commission a performance of Shakespeare’s Richard II at the Globe by the Chamberlain’s Men on 7 February 1601 – just a day before the Earl assembled about 300 supporters and marched into London.
In the play, King Richard II is deposed as England’s monarch. It’s usually thought that Shakespeare’s troupe was in the wrong place at the wrong time and had nothing to do with the short-lived coup, which lasted a single day.
The new research may suggest that Essex’s men turned to the players because they knew Shakespeare was sympathetic to their cause – and hoped a rousing performance could encourage London’s public to rise up in support of the Earl.
Six Wives: A HistoryExtra podcast series
Member exclusive | In this six-part podcast series, we’ll be peeling back the layers of mythmaking to take another look at these fascinating women, who shaped the course of Henry’s reign – and the history of England.
Listen to all episodes now
Arshad says: “Shakespeare uses language and imagery that is provocative, tipping humour over into satire, and that would have been deemed potentially libellous by the authorities.”
As You Like It was among three Shakespeare plays to be temporarily restricted from publication in August 1600, she notes. Another was Henry V, which includes a chorus “praising Essex to the skies” for his military action in Ireland, written before he had fallen out of favour.
Arshad explains: “All the plays that were ‘staied’ were published shortly afterwards, except As You Like It, which wasn’t issued until after Shakespeare’s death, in the First Folio of 1623. Henry V was published initially without the chorus that championed the Earl of Essex.”
This new research suggests this delay in publication may be related to the politically radical message Shakespeare had smuggled into the play – offering sympathetic support for a spurned former favourite of Elizabeth’s only a couple of years before he mounted an ambitious, if unsuccessful, rebellion.
]]> Jakob Barnes <![CDATA[Who was the real Agnes Shakespeare? The true story behind Hamnet's leading lady]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/tudor/real-agnes-shakespeare-anne-hathaway-hamnet/ 2026-07-07T17:43:37.000Z 2026-07-07T17:43:37.000Z Being entitled Hamnet, you might expect Chloé Zhao’s movie to focus squarely on the life of the young Shakespeare boy. Or perhaps, you’d expect that it’d be the boy’s father who takes centre stage. You’d be wrong.
No, it’s Agnes Shakespeare, played by Jessie Buckley in an Academy Award-winning performance, who is the beating heart of this Elizabethan period drama.
But just how accurately does Hamnet portray Agnes and what is the story behind the historical figure who inspired Buckley’s character?
Who was the real Agnes Shakespeare?
While the name Agnes Shakespeare is used in historical records, such as her father’s will, and in various works of literature (and films such as Hamnet), the wife of William Shakespeare is more commonly known as Anne Hathaway.
Very little is truly known about Agnes, with most documentation about her life largely relating to her marriage to William Shakespeare. But we do know that she most likely grew up in her family’s farmhouse in Shottery, a village not far away from Stratford-upon-Avon.
She was born in 1556 and died on August 6, 1623, surviving her husband by seven years. They had three children together, including Hamnet, the boy who inspired Maggie O’Farrell’s novel and the subsequent movie.
How accurate is Hamnet’s portrayal of Agnes?
Much like the real history behind Hamnet as a whole, the premise of the film (and the book) is built on the few facts we know about Agnes Shakespeare, with the many gaps filled in by imagination and speculation.
There are few records of Agnes, and in particular there is little or nothing relating to her general routines and ways of life. That’s where fiction comes into play, with O’Farrell inventing certain character traits, and even going as far as to depict Agnes as a healer who practised rituals rooted in folklore and had prophetic abilities.
In a less fantastical sense, the fact that Agnes is shown to read and write in Hamnet is also highly likely to be inaccurate. As the daughter of a farmer, there is little chance that someone such as Agnes would have been taught any kind of literary skills in Elizabethan England – unless she learned them from her playwright husband. Indeed, the only aspects of Agnes’ life that we know Hamnet gets right for certain are the timeline of the major events in her life, and the broad strokes of her family life and marriage with William Shakespeare.
Why is Anne Hathaway called Agnes in Hamnet?
Historically, most of the records pertaining to William Shakespeare’s wife refer to her as Anne Hathaway (using her maiden name) or Anne Shakespeare after their marriage in 1582.
However, when her father, Richard Hathaway, died in 1581, he listed her as Agnes Hathaway. In 16th-century England, the names Agnes and Anne were interchangeable, and it would appear her father preferred to use Agnes rather than the more commonly used Anne.
- Read more | The most common accidental way to die in Tudor England reveals surprising truths about daily life
The name Anne was used in her marriage certificate and other legal documents, so it’s fair to assume that she leaned more towards Anne in her everyday life.
Was Anne Hathaway really a healer?
There is no evidence that Anne Hathaway was a healer or that she dabbled in herbalism or mysticism. This concept is entirely rooted in Maggie O’Farrell’s descriptions of the character in her 2020 novel.
Still, the ideas of herbalist treatments and being highly attuned to nature are not exactly outrageous nor uncommon, particularly at that time in history, when more natural medicines were a primary source of healthcare for most people.
Everyday citizens in Elizabethan England would often rely on local knowledge and botanical remedies. It was usually the wives and mothers in a household who would be responsible for growing various herbs and using these to form treatments as and when needed.
So, while there is no proof that Anne Hathaway was a healer, spiritual or otherwise, it is not inconceivable that she would be aware of these kinds of medical processes and would quite likely have used herbal treatments in her lifetime.
What was Anne Hathaway and Shakespeare’s marriage like?
In the film, the first meeting between Agnes and William is purely by chance. Agnes is seen wandering in woodland and William catches sight of her from the window of the building where he is tutoring children. Drawn to the mysterious woman, William leaves his class and speaks to Agnes, and they almost immediately strike up an intense relationship.
In reality, we do not know exactly how the pair met. However, we do know that they lived about a mile apart during that time, with Anne/Agnes residing in Shottery and William living in Stratford-upon-Avon. Their fathers – John Shakespeare a glover and Richard Hathaway a farmer – would more than likely have done business with one another. Indeed, it appears that John paid some debts for Richard, suggesting they knew each other well and might have even been friends. So, it’s probable that Anne and William would have crossed paths quite naturally.
- Read more | What happened to Shakespeare's daughters? A guide to the playwright's family life and descendants
Another element of real life that the film aligns with effectively is the nature of the couple’s marriage. Based on records of their marriage and the birth of their first child, Susanna, we know that Anne was roughly three months pregnant when she and William tied the knot. The idea of a “shotgun wedding”, and one that her family would have been disapproving of, is likely to be true to history.
William and Anne were married in November 1582 under a special license. The age gap between the couple – William was just 18 years old, while Anne was 26 – was quite uncommon, with William considered a young groom for the period.
They had two more children, twins Hamnet and Judith, born in 1585. As we know, Hamnet would die at the age of 11 in 1596, causing heartbreak within the family.
- Read more | What happened to Shakespeare's daughters? A guide to the playwright's family life and descendants
In Hamnet, the strain of William living and working in London amplifies the pain suffered by Agnes back at home in Stratford-upon-Avon. This plays into the idea that they shared an intense and difficult marriage after Hamnet’s passing.
For a long time, historians believed much the same, too. However, more recently, the idea that William abandoned his family in their time of crisis has been questioned, with evidence suggesting William and Anne actually lived together in London between 1600 and 1610. In addition, love letters addressed to “good Mrs. Shakespeare” suggest a far more affectionate and happy marriage than initially thought.
When William retired in 1613, he moved back to Stratford-upon-Avon to be with Anne in their home at New Place. He died in 1616.
What did Shakespeare leave Anne Hathaway in his will?
After he famously left Anne the “second best bed” in their house, William Shakespeare’s will drove the narrative of a marriage that took a turn for the worst, which many believed was a slight against his wife.
The truth is, traditionally, the “best bed” in the house would have been reserved for guests, with the “second best bed” being the marital bed. In light of this, historians and literary experts now perceive William’s gesture to be a more sentimental and loving bequest.
As we mentioned earlier, Anne (or Agnes) was also a benefactor in her father, Richard Hathaway’s will. From him, she received the sum of ten marks, which would equate to around £6, 13 shillings and fourpence. That money was to be paid “at the day of her marriage”, which happened to be just over a year after the death of her father in September 1581.
]]> Jakob Barnes <![CDATA[Is Hamnet based on a true story? The real history behind the Shakespeare drama]]> https://www.historyextra.com/period/tudor/is-hamnet-a-true-story-real-history-historical-accuracy/ 2026-07-07T17:43:59.000Z 2026-07-07T17:18:44.000Z William Shakespeare has shaped storytelling for centuries. The legendary wordsmith altered the English language, and countless artists have tried to replicate his style and flair or dig deep into his life for inspiration. But few have done so as intimately as Hamnet director Chloé Zhao.
Zhao’s Hamnet is an adaptation of Maggie O'Farrell’s novel of the same name. It tells the story of Shakespeare’s relationship with his wife, Agnes (Anne Hathaway in most historical documents), and the grief they suffer after the death of their young son, Hamnet.
But, with a story so steeped in history, just how accurate is the film?
Is Hamnet based on a true story?
Hamnet is built on a foundation of known facts about William Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway’s life together, but fills the gaps in the historical record with poetic license and conjecture.
While the central cast of characters portrayed in Hamnet are indeed based on real historical figures, and many of the broad plot points are true to history, the film is very much a fictional elaboration.
How accurate is Hamnet's portrayal of the Shakespeares’ marriage?
At the start of Zhao’s Hamnet, we see William and Agnes meet. William is a tutor and Agnes is a spiritual healer immersed in nature and folklore. They court for a brief period before Agnes falls pregnant and the pair marry, much to the disapproval of Agnes’ family.
- Read more | Who was the real Agnes Shakespeare?
In truth, historians do not know how William and Anne met.
Their homes were roughly a mile and a half apart, so it’s likely that the pair crossed paths in Stratford, like they do in the film. It is also thought their respective fathers knew one another via their work – John Shakespeare was a glove-maker and Richard Hathaway was a successful farmer.
Historical documents show their marriage license was officially recorded in November 1582, and their first child was born just six months later, revealing that Anne was with child before the nuptials took place. But there is no record of how the Hathaway family reacted to the pregnancy or marriage.
William and Anne would go on to have three children together. Susannah came first, born in 1583, with twins Hamnet and Judith following in 1585. The film lines up with this sequence of events, from the names to the dates.
In Hamnet, we see William leave for London to pursue his career as a playwright, which causes immense strain on his marriage. But William and Agnes’ marriage in Hamnet is more fraught and dramatic than historical documents suggest, and we can’t know for certain what their relationship was really like. The financial support he provided to his family was significant, and the attention to detail in his last will and testament almost certainly proves he had the family’s interests at heart. And while historians initially believed that young William (just 18-years-old when he married 26-year-old Anne) had fled to London and abandoned his wife, love letters have since surfaced which carry an affectionate and warm tone.
Indeed, there is thought to be no evidence that their marriage was subject to the strain we see in the film, aside from the obvious impact of their shared grief. It’s unclear to what extent William and Anne’s relationship deteriorated after their son’s death – if it did at all. In the film, the couple become estranged and do not see each other again until Agnes travels to London to watch William’s new play, Hamlet. Naturally, as we do not have day-to-day records of what William and Anne did or how they felt, it’s hard to know just how close or distant they were. This aspect of the film is taken from Maggie O’Farrell’s book, which leans into the idea that their marriage was under immense strain until that emotional, cathartic performance of the play.
William and Anne remained married until his death in 1616. For the last five years of his life, they lived together in their home known as New Place, in Stratford-upon-Avon. There is even evidence in a fragmented letter from the 17th century that the pair spent a lot of time in London together while William was working there.
Did Hamnet really die of the plague?
In the film, William and Agnes lose their son to the bubonic plague in 1596. The death of the young boy is the key moment the story is centered around. It’s the emotional crux of the narrative, which pushes William further away towards his work in London, while leaving Agnes in a deep state of depression. While the date lines up with the death of the real child, much of the drama in Hamnet is creative invention, including the cause of death.
In the film, William tasks Hamnet with looking after their family, so when his sister contracts the plague, Hamnet takes it upon himself to cure her at any cost. He sleeps next to Judith, planning to trick death itself and take her place. His wish is granted, but it comes at a heavy cost.
In reality, we do not know how the real Hamnet died.
In 1596, parish registers did not generally record cause of death. The most widely accepted theory is that Hamnet did indeed fall victim to the plague, given outbreaks were rampant during that time, especially among children. But smallpox, tuberculosis, influenza, typhus, dysentery and scarlet fever also affected children en masse throughout England in the 16th century, and some historians have posited that Hamnet might have died in an accident, such as drowning.
- Read more | The most common accidental way to die in Tudor England reveals surprising truths about daily life
All we know for certain is that the real-life Hamnet was buried in the churchyard at Holy Trinity in Stratford-upon-Avon on 11 August 1596.
Did Hamnet’s death inspire Hamlet?
While there is no conclusive evidence that Hamlet was inspired by death of young Hamnet, it is widely thought that the feelings of grief Shakespeare surely experienced at that time helped to, at the very least, shape the themes in the play.
Given Shakespeare wrote Hamlet sometime between 1599 and 1601, the timeline certainly fits that his son’s death would have been at the forefront of his mind while working on it, and the play is permeated by an atmosphere of mourning. It is also worth noting that the names Hamnet and Hamlet were pretty much interchangeable in the 16th century, so it’s unlikely a coincidence that Shakespeare bestowed that title on his play.
However, at no point in the play do we see Hamlet (or any character, for that matter) struck down by illness as Shakespeare’s son likely was. Hamlet is a complex tale of revenge, with the titular young prince looking to avenge his father’s untimely death and unseat his uncle, Claudius, from the throne. Violent death is the order of the day.
Narratively speaking, there are no similarities between Hamlet and what happened to Hamnet. But the play is full of untimely familial deaths and overwhelming grief drives the plot. Ophelia and Laertes lose their father, Polonius, and Laertes loses Ophelia. But the father-son relationship at the play’s core is perhaps the most obvious link between Hamlet and Shakespeare’s own life. Just as Shakespeare was robbed of his son, Hamlet is robbed of his father.
Throughout the story, the spectre of Hamlet’s father lingers, quite literally, and this concept of the afterlife – of connecting with the loved ones we have lost – may have been a way for Shakespeare to grapple with the idea that his son might not be truly gone.
What happened to the rest of Shakespeare’s children?
William and Anne’s eldest child, Susanna, has only a minor role in the Hamnet narrative, but her real life was eventful and well-documented. She married a highly respected local physician, John Hall, in 1607 and they welcomed their one and only child, a daughter named Elizabeth, a year later.
However, in 1613, things took a tumultuous turn when a local man named John Lane publicly accused Susanna of adultery and claimed she had a venereal disease. Those claims were unfounded, and Susanna successfully brought a case of slander against the man in the bishop's consistory court.
- Read more | What happened to Shakespeare's daughters? A guide to the playwright's family life and descendants
Susanna would ultimately inherit the majority of her father’s estate when he passed in 1616, including William and Anne’s home at New Place. She and her husband were even entrusted to be the executors of William Shakespeare’s will.
Susanna died in 1649, and she was buried alongside her parents and close to her brother, Hamnet, in Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon.
As for Hamnet’s twin sister, Judith Shakespeare, she married in 1616, just a couple of months before the death of her father. She married wine merchant Thomas Quiney, but they were briefly excommunicated after failing to obtain a specific marriage license needed to wed during Lent. The marriage also endured a difficult start after Thomas impregnated another woman, who died in childbirth along with their stillborn child.
Judith and her husband had three sons, named Shakespeare, Richard and Thomas. All three children would die very young. Shakespeare Quiney died shortly after his baptism, at only six months old, while Thomas and Richard both died in 1639 within nine days of one another, aged 19 and 21, respectively.
Judith died on 9 February 1662, just a week after her 77th birthday. She survived her last living child by 23 years.
How accurate is Hamnet’s portrayal of Elizabethan England?
While Maggie O’Farrell’s novel and, in turn, Zhao’s movie filled in the gaps of William Shakespeare’s life story, the film impressively captures some essential truths about life in Elizabethan England.
The vast rural backdrop of Stratford-upon-Avon and the classic Elizabethan architecture are depicted wonderfully in Hamnet, though the film was actually shot 60 miles away from Stratford in the village of Weobley in Herefordshire.
- Read more | Did someone else write the plays of William Shakespeare? The real history that debunks the conspiracy
The film also represents the standard of living and daily routines of people like William and Agnes in provincial towns effectively. The fact that William struggles at first to establish himself in London and needs to work extra jobs to fund his passions is a genuine portrayal of the class structure and economic state of the 16th century. And the novel in particular does a great job of establishing the geography around The Globe Theatre, which plays host to the climactic performance of Hamlet, with descriptions of bear-baiting rings and brothels nearby, and a grimy essence to the surrounding streets.
And, of course, life in Elizabethan England was tragically tinged with the overarching threat of disease and infection, particularly among infants. The fact that the bubonic plague looms over the story in Hamnet is, sadly, very accurate.
On the other hand, the English spoken in Hamnet is one of the more fictionalized elements of the story. William and Anne would’ve spoken Early Modern English, which was influenced by very strong regional dialects and would sound foreign to modern listeners.
]]>