Five Shakespeare Characters Based on Real Historical Figures

Does art copy life, or does life copy art? For William Shakespeare, it was often the former. His famous characters, from tragic lovers to plotting rulers, were not all born from pure imagination. Many were inspired by the real legends of his day. While characters like Othello and Prospero are fictional, Shakespeare frequently borrowed from the real world. As the playwright himself wrote, “The world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” In his plays, history often provided the script. Here are five of Shakespeare's most famous characters who were based on real kings, queens, and generals, giving these historical figures a dramatic second life on stage.

Before he was asking "to be or not to be," Hamlet was rooted in history. The Prince of Denmark was inspired by the story of a Viking prince named Amleth. According to medieval legend, Amleth's uncle murdered his father to take the throne. The young prince then pretended to be insane as he planned his revenge. His story involves clever tricks, family conflict, and deadly plots.

Most of what we know about Amleth comes from a 13th-century book by Saxo Grammaticus called Deeds of the Danes. This chronicle of Danish history and legend gave Shakespeare the blueprint for The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Variations of this clever-prince story appear in myths from many cultures. Historians debate how much of Amleth's story is fact versus legend. However, the seeds of Shakespeare’s tragic hero are clearly found in this Viking tale.

Shakespeare took Saxo’s Amleth and changed him into a complex, philosophical figure. This new Hamlet spends much of the play thinking deeply about life, death, and morality. The other characters also reflect historical patterns. King Claudius is a scheming ruler, Queen Gertrude is caught in political webs, and Polonius is the interfering royal advisor.

The real Amleth's death was less theatrical than Hamlet's. Shakespeare’s hero dies from a poisoned sword in a dramatic duel. The legendary Viking prince reportedly lived long enough to get revenge and become king. History did not need a stage duel to make his story compelling.

The main character of The Tragedy of Macbeth was also based on a real king: Macbeth, who ruled Scotland from 1040 to 1057. The historical Macbeth was very different from the murderous tyrant Shakespeare created. He seems to have been a fair and capable ruler. He kept order in his kingdom, supported Christianity, led successful military campaigns, and even traveled to Rome.

Shakespeare’s Macbeth is a man driven by a prophecy and his own ambition. In the play, witches tell him he will become king, which fuels his terrible actions. The historical king had a different path to power. He already had a legitimate claim to the throne through his family line. His marriage to Gruoch, a king's granddaughter, further strengthened his right to rule.

The play shows Macbeth murdering King Duncan in a secret, planned act. In reality, King Duncan was killed in battle. In August 1040, Macbeth defeated and killed Duncan near Elgin, Scotland. He secured the crown that same year. This historical event was less dramatic than Shakespeare's version, but it was just as important.

Cleopatra is one of history's most famous queens. Her portrayal in Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra helped cement her legend as a brilliant leader. She was the last ruler of Egypt’s Ptolemaic dynasty. Cleopatra VII formed alliances with the Roman leaders Julius Caesar and Marc Antony. She skillfully navigated Rome’s dangerous politics while protecting her own kingdom. Fluent in many languages and a skilled diplomat, she was far more than just a seductive figure. Roman historians like Plutarch wrote about her talents but focused more on her romances than her political skill. This bias influenced Shakespeare's version.

In Antony and Cleopatra, Shakespeare turned political strategy into gripping theater. The romance between Cleopatra and Antony becomes the central story. Her suicide is presented as a tragic, passionate ending. In real life, Cleopatra and Antony’s partnership balanced love and politics. They had three children and worked to strengthen Egypt's position against Rome. Cleopatra’s death was likely driven as much by a desire to avoid shameful captivity as by lost love.

Shakespeare’s Richard III is one of literature's great villains. However, the real man was more than just a hunchbacked schemer. He was the last Plantagenet king of England. He ruled from 1483 until his death at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. His defeat ended the Wars of the Roses and began the Tudor dynasty.

In the play Richard III, Shakespeare portrays him as a deformed, manipulative plotter. This character is willing to murder anyone to become king. In reality, Richard was a shrewd politician and military leader. He took power after his brother, King Edward IV, died. His two young nephews, the “Princes in the Tower,” mysteriously disappeared. Historians still argue about whether Richard was responsible. He also passed legal reforms and tried to stabilize a kingdom damaged by civil war.

Shakespeare’s focus on Richard’s evil nature and physical deformity comes more from Tudor propaganda than from fact. The only real physical issue Richard had was scoliosis, which made one shoulder slightly higher than the other. Shakespeare exaggerated Richard's villainy to create exciting drama and to please the ruling Tudor family. He turned a capable, though ambitious, king into one of the stage's most famous sinners.

Joan la Pucelle, better known as Joan of Arc, was a peasant girl whose life became a legend. She was born in France in the early 15th century. As a young woman, she reported hearing divine voices. These voices told her to lead French forces against the English during the Hundred Years’ War. With great courage and sharp strategic thinking, she inspired soldiers, broke sieges, and helped win key victories for France.

Our knowledge of Joan comes mostly from records of her trial and accounts written at the time. These sources describe her visions, her military actions, and her capture and execution at age 19. While some miraculous claims are debated, her extraordinary impact in such a short time is undeniable.

Shakespeare adapted her story in his play Henry VI, calling her "Joan la Pucelle." He portrayed her as a fierce, almost magical figure. In the play, Joan first appears as a skilled and respected warrior. By the end, however, Shakespeare reduces her to a caricature based on English insults. She is shown as a witch who summons evil spirits. Her character makes confusing claims that damage her credibility. These choices reflect English prejudice more than historical truth. In reality, Joan did not win the war alone. Yet, her strong determination and inspirational leadership were crucial in uniting French forces and changing the course of history.