Plays

Henry VI, Part Three

Henry VI, Part Three

  • Downloads：9585
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-07-26 09:53:54
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：William Shakespeare
  • ISBN：0199537119
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

This new edition to the Oxford Shakespeare series， based on the 1623 First Folio text， challenges conventional thinking about the nature and relationship of the earliest texts。 It contributes substantial new evidence about Shakespeare's revision of the plays and the introduction and commentary focus on stage-oriented discussions of the play's meaning and reception。

About the Series: For over 100 years Oxford World's Classics has made available the broadest spectrum of literature from around the globe。 Each affordable volume reflects Oxford's commitment to scholarship， providing the most accurate text plus a wealth of other valuable features， including expert introductions by leading authorities， voluminous notes to clarify the text， up-to-date bibliographies for further study， and much more。

Download

Reviews

Emma H-W ，

By far my favourite of the Henry VIs

Bernie Gourley ，

Here we witness a tug-of-war for the British monarchy that plays out to a decisive conclusion （eventually。） It begins with Henry VI as king， but the Duke of York has gained the upper-hand。 Henry makes a deal that， upon his death， succession will pass back to the Duke’s line， but not before。 The Duke reluctantly agrees， but the deal makes everyone else furious。 Margaret （Henry’s Queen） is upset because her son has lost his right to succession。 The Duke’s sons are also displeased because they thin Here we witness a tug-of-war for the British monarchy that plays out to a decisive conclusion （eventually。） It begins with Henry VI as king， but the Duke of York has gained the upper-hand。 Henry makes a deal that， upon his death， succession will pass back to the Duke’s line， but not before。 The Duke reluctantly agrees， but the deal makes everyone else furious。 Margaret （Henry’s Queen） is upset because her son has lost his right to succession。 The Duke’s sons are also displeased because they think their father should strike while the iron is hot， rather than risking that Henry’s strength and popularity will rise。 tThe Queen’s displeasure leads her and Clifford （enemy to the Duke， who killed Clifford’s father） to go on the offensive to reacquire the line of succession。 They kill the Duke’s youngest son， a child， and then the Duke， himself。 This would strengthen Henry’s position， but fortune doesn’t shine for long on anyone in this play， and soon the Duke’s sons capture Henry and Edward （the Duke’s eldest son） is crowned。 But then Edward lusts after the first woman he meets as King， the widow Lady Grey， and being rebuffed in his plan to make Grey his “side piece，” he proposes to her。 Unfortunately， Edward has already dispatched the Earl of Warwick to propose to the sister of the French King。 This leads to the humiliation of Warwick （not to mention the French King’s sister，） and Warwick （with French troops） goes back and dethrones Edward。 This， too， is short-lived。 Edward consolidates support， captures Henry， and defeats Warwick。 As the play ends it might seem stability has been achieved， but we know Edward’s brother， Richard， has ambitions。tWhile this one of Shakespeare’s earliest plays and it’s constrained by events， it’s worth a read。 It has a lot to say about how arrogance， lust， and timidness can all precede a downfall。 。。。more

Andrew ，

Three history plays， written out of sequence （II， then III， then I）， variously attributed to Shakespeare， with differing stylistic modes， span the life of King Henry VI， child successor to the early demise of Henry V， which pick up the War of the Roses unifying theme developed from Richard II to Richard III， and continue the wars with France。 A lot happens and some big characters have their day - Joan of Arc， Catholic martyr of the French （10% of dialogue of Part I）， the Duke of Gloucester， the Three history plays， written out of sequence （II， then III， then I）， variously attributed to Shakespeare， with differing stylistic modes， span the life of King Henry VI， child successor to the early demise of Henry V， which pick up the War of the Roses unifying theme developed from Richard II to Richard III， and continue the wars with France。 A lot happens and some big characters have their day - Joan of Arc， Catholic martyr of the French （10% of dialogue of Part I）， the Duke of Gloucester， the later Richard III's father （7% of Part I， 10% of II）， the brawling Richard， Duke of Gloucester （14% of III）， Queen Margaret （10% of II and III）， Jack Cade， champion of a people's rebellion （8% of II）， and not least the pious， troubled King Henry VI himself （7% of I， 10% of II， 12% of III， but not the primary roles of any [5th， 2nd and 4th respectively]）。Bate， in the RSC compilation， briefly outlines the provenance of authorship of the plays， supported by 21st century stylometric analysis。 Part II of 1591 demonstrates possible co-authorship; Part III of the same year demonstrates probable co-authorship， and Part I， of 1592， is likely to have had as many as four hands working on it。 Shakespeare probably wrote nearly all of Part II， some of Part III， and only some scenes of Part I。 Part II has 'gloriously Shakespearean energy and variety'; Part III has some 'immensely powerful rhetorical encounters but many longueurs' （tedious passages）; and Part I demonstrates only Shakespearean quality in the rose-plucking scene of 2。4 and the 'moving dialogue' between Talbot and his son in the battle of 4。6 （RSC Palgrave Macmillan， 2012， p。4）。 These probable attributions are generally held because the quality of the Shakespearean passages is matched by the stylistic analysis。The First Folio of 1623 first brings the three plays into one printing and designates their correct parts， whereas the earlier short quarto versions of Parts II and III were originally entitled 'The First Part of the Contention of the two Famous Houses of York and Lancaster' and 'The True Tragedy of Richard Duke of York'。 All three were probably developed from authorial papers as opposed to scribal copies of the printer's or theatrical papers。 An Octavo version of Part III existed。 The Folio version of Part I has no quarto original extant。 Part I is 100% verse， Part II 85%， and Part III 100%。 Sources for Part I were Edward Hall's The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and Yorke （1548） and Holinshed's Chronicles （1587）， the Temple garden scene and Talbot with his son are Shakespearean inventions。 These sources were also used for Parts II and III， supplemented （probably） with John Foxe's Actes and Monuments （1583） for Part II， a Protestant matryrology。It is unknown whether the plays were performed back-to-back as a trilogy at the time， while we fit them into the first tetralogy （written）， along with Richard III of 1592-4， in later historical chronology， matched with the second tetralogy （written） of earlier historical chronology （Richard II [1595-6]， 1 Henry IV [1596-7]， 2 Henry IV [1597-8] and Henry V [1599]）。 Many directors have subsequently linked up all these Wars of the Roses plays， both on stage and screen， such as the BBC Hollow Crown series （2012-2016）， while some directors have squished the three plays into two， as in Peter Hall's Wars of the Roses production of the 1970s。 But since we read them both as separate plays and part of a trilogy， the arrogance in compressing them into two， strikes as somehow impure - even while their impurity is established。 I then treat each play separately， as part of a trilogy and as part of a tetralogy。Henry VI Part III continues from immediately after the first battle of St。 Albans， the end of the prequel， where the Lancastrians have lost key nobles and the King flown。 The Yorkist party arrives at Parliament first， and York takes the throne。 Henry's arrival and reproach sees squabbling ensue， but in order to end the civil war， agrees with York that if he live out his remainder as King， York and his line may resume the crown after。 York agrees， though his brawling sons argue against it， and takes the oath。 However， on departure of the King， York plots to bring Henry's end sooner。 Margaret's reproach to Henry bears no fruit， so she instead summons a large army out of the north， under Northumberland and Westmorland， and they march on York's castle， the white rose outnumbered。The language of the play is more consistently mature and assured， lending it a greater integrity， the dialogue between the episodic battles weaving a richer story， the plots and conspiracies rivalled by the development of character。 As a result， the last of the trilogy feels a much more worthy bridge to the very mature-feeling - while still 'early' - Richard III [1592-1594]， the last of the Roses' first tetralogy （written）。 While it is probably co-authored， if the main authorship is Shakespeare， then Shakespeare in his very first plays demonstrates his concern as much with character development as with plot， which came to maturity only shortly afterwards with Romeo and Juliet [1595-1596]， a play as strong in character as it is in balance of structure。 But Richard III is his springboard to a new maturity， the character of Richard fixed in the mind like a wind-gnarled tree on a bleak promontory。 Yet in between sits the grotesquely gory Titus Andronicus [1591-1592]， the naïve Two Gentlemen Of Verona [1591-1592]， and the unimpressive farce The Comedy Of Errors [1594]， although the character-led Taming Of The Shrew [1589-1592] among these may be even earlier。 Certainly， it is difficult to believe in the scholarly evidence of the sequence of these plays （based on their last possible authorship dates）。However， what we've got is a placement of the three parts of Henry IV all around 1991-2， and since the linguistic comparisons indicate the scope of Shakespearean authorship， we must judge by that。 It is therefore possible that Part III， while co-authored， was later revised by Shakespeare more fully than Part II， because the linguistic development is clearly more assured， and far from the obviously botched multiply-authored Part I （written a year later）。 Already we see the early aggression of Richard Gloucester， and certainly Richard's last soliloquy [5。6] is very close to his early intimations in his self-titled play， that you can well imagine that Shakespeare not only already had in mind his own piece to end the Roses octet， but was probably champing at the bit to get down to writing that next。 The possibilities shout out of this text for the successive work。 My feeling is that Titus Andronicus and Two Gentlemen Of Verona were earlier works than these histories， and that Shakespeare had already moved on to Richard III as the collaborative Part I was being bundled together， and that The Comedy Of Errors followed the last history of this tetralogy， rather than preceded it。 Certainly you would be inclined to a bit of farce after the black bleakness of Richard， darker than Titus， his bloodiest play yet， despite all its disgusting gore。 By now， Shakespeare must have been in a fever of creative imagination - and it shows in Part III， a much richer play than its prequels。It shows， further， in the gentle scenes interstitial to the battles which make up the front half of the play， namely， the son-who-killed-his-father and the father-who-killed-his-son scene （2。5） of passionate anguish， where the meditating King Henry sits in melancholy witness; and in the scene of the two gamekeepers at the border of Scotland （3。1）， where the former king Henry wanders between them and their game， rueing the fortunes of his Margaret。 If the style of the language speaks not for Shakespeare's pen （and it does， with its enjambment and avoidance of pretty constructs - while yet not venturing into the obscure， such as in Macbeth [1605-1606]， for example）， these passages do。 They seam the history together with the human， as Shakespeare ensures that character contends with plot， and pathos is the effect of its simplicity （compared to the bathos of the pomp of Part I's simplistic imagery）。 This too is very much the mark of Shakespeare。 There is as yet no complex linguistic gymnastics， but there is depth in its layers of understatement （though not a fault you could ever level at Richard）。 Shakespeare knows how to pace， to surge and to retire， to balance and to vary colour。Meantime， the crown changes hands more often than a bad penny， and Henry， fed up with it all， retires to his meditations， while Edward， now up， now down， is as casual about his fate。 There are almost more battles than characters to this play， but Shakespeare makes of it a well-structured and fitting piece， with its strong characterisation and beautifully paced 'pastoral' scenes between the battles， to bridge the historical gap between its prequels and its successor。 If further proof were needed of his mind already on Richard III， witness Gloucester's soliloquy at 3。2， his calculating mind already on the crown before Edward （IV） has even got a wife （Lady Elizabeth Grey）。 The foul brawler has 'neither pity， love nor fear' （5。6。68）， and betrays his colour - black - beneath the chameleon pretence。 Not yet the maw of Ragnarök， but that's not far off。 Such a delicious villain。 Yes， Part III is a superb bridge to that great play， come Richard's day。 。。。more

Alison ，

Ohhh maybe this is where GRRM got it。 How To Write Royal Political Drama:1。 Kill everyone。2。 No really， kill eeeeeeveryone， also cut off a lot of heads。3。 Have other characters smack-talk the dead beheaded ones。4。 Repeat until your neighbors stop saying hello from the driveway and start doing frantic Zillow searches。 I mean。 There's a lot of stabbing going on in here， and a lot of "Hello I'm here and here's a fuckin' head of some poor schmuck" too。Of course it's not just that。 Shakespeare real Ohhh maybe this is where GRRM got it。 How To Write Royal Political Drama:1。 Kill everyone。2。 No really， kill eeeeeeveryone， also cut off a lot of heads。3。 Have other characters smack-talk the dead beheaded ones。4。 Repeat until your neighbors stop saying hello from the driveway and start doing frantic Zillow searches。 I mean。 There's a lot of stabbing going on in here， and a lot of "Hello I'm here and here's a fuckin' head of some poor schmuck" too。Of course it's not just that。 Shakespeare really delves into the nitty-gritty of The Wars of the Roses， and we see all the machinations and schemes and betrayals and revenge that you'd expect。 It's quite meticulous， almost to a fault， because I'll admit I had a difficult time following the plot and remembering who was who， which characters hated each other， why this guy killed that guy， etc。 Plus， I wish people were more creative with names back then。 We have King Edward and Prince Edward and then another Prince Edward。 I kept flipping back to the cast list at the beginning to refresh my memory。There are a lot of battle scenes， which obviously don't work as well on the page as the stage， especially when it's a play and not a novel。 When a battle is reduced to a stage direction reading "They fight，" it kinda takes the wind out those sails。 But there were also some really great speeches and some primo bickering and bitching that make you think you could totally do a retelling of this in a high school and barely have to change anything。Um， except maybe no beheadings。I didn't love this one because like I said， it was confusing to follow at times， and it got a bit tedious with all the wannabe-royal dick-waving contests。 But it's engaging nonetheless， and definitely has me looking forward （as much as I can with the histories） to Richard III。 。。。more

Kimberly Brooks ，

Lots of intrigue and loyalty-changing in this one。 Easier to follow than most， and not as many random characters/scenes that had nothing to do with the story。

Serafina Pevensie ，

Definitely the best out of the three parts， potentially just because so much time is spent on insulting people in the most creative way possible right before stabbing them。 Some parts were actually quite beautiful （e。g。 York's final speech） but I mainly appreciated it because the characters became firmly established in their own characteristics （I'm looking at you girlboss Margaret） and because it was fun to try and decide which side you were supporting， especially seen as loyalties were changed Definitely the best out of the three parts， potentially just because so much time is spent on insulting people in the most creative way possible right before stabbing them。 Some parts were actually quite beautiful （e。g。 York's final speech） but I mainly appreciated it because the characters became firmly established in their own characteristics （I'm looking at you girlboss Margaret） and because it was fun to try and decide which side you were supporting， especially seen as loyalties were changed and oaths revoked at every turn。 All in all， not as boring as I expected， although it did make me wonder if Henry VI actually spent as much time being a soppy wet blanket in real life as he does in the play， or if Shakespeare just didn't like him。 。。。more

Kevin ，

It seems that the best characters are forced to share the stage with the main characters as we trace the rise of the House of York to the throne。 The constant side switching by many of the lords likewise is less thrilling in the page。

Christine ，

Sarjan kolmas osa lässähti pahan kerran。 Jossakin vaiheessa lakkasin edes yrittämästä tietää kuka on milloinkin äänessä， varsinkin kun sillä ei tuntunut olevan suurtakaan väliä kokonaisuudelle。 Jostakin temmataan uusi saman niminen tyyppi kun edellinen on tapettu。 Jos kakkososassa mestattiin kaikki ja niiden kaverit， niin tässä pistettiin oikein olan takaa （ja varmaan muutamankin kerran läpi）。

Nicholas Vessel ，

Henry VI， Part 3 is an intriguing yet exhausting conclusion to Shakespeare's exploration of the mild king。With the War of the Roses finally at hand， 3H6 weaves an exciting story with all the gore and vitriol of its predecessors。 Acts 1 and 5 are marvelous， with moments finally （finally！） achieving the fusion of verse， psychology， and excitement that I loved Shakespeare for ever since I was thirteen。 The turn of （thepreviously entirely unsympathetic） Margaret of Anjou from mocking a man's tears a Henry VI， Part 3 is an intriguing yet exhausting conclusion to Shakespeare's exploration of the mild king。With the War of the Roses finally at hand， 3H6 weaves an exciting story with all the gore and vitriol of its predecessors。 Acts 1 and 5 are marvelous， with moments finally （finally！） achieving the fusion of verse， psychology， and excitement that I loved Shakespeare for ever since I was thirteen。 The turn of （thepreviously entirely unsympathetic） Margaret of Anjou from mocking a man's tears at his young child's murder in Act 1 to her wailing at the injustice at her own son's murder at the hand of the murdered child's older brothers is harrowing， beautifully parallel， and natural。The plays flaws show themselves in the midsections （and even bleed out a bit to the final act）， where a frustrating amount of scenes are composed to two characters saying:"Damn！ The fearsome [enemy general] has taken to [English territory] field！""No matter， as I am brave and my cause is just， I shall meet them！""I am with you， then！"I'll cut Bill some slack， since I can tell he's wanting to hit those famous historical battles， but it makes for an exhausting read （I can't imagine seeing it on stage）。 If it wasn't for the presence of the Richard III-to-be， the play would fall far below Part 2 for these relentless scenes。Richard is a fantastic character， perhaps the absolute best Bill made as a very young man。 His speech in Act 3 where he reveals himself to be the beast that all Junior Shakespeareans remember from their undergrad courses as well as his post-regicide gloating in Act 5 are the two crowning moments of the play。 His personality is layered with deception and motives （the nagging Freudian inside all of us screams to focus too much on his frustration with romance） and he has a dark humor that serves the bleak play well。 He carries the show the same way Joan of Arc carried Part 1 and Jack Cade carried Part 2， but he's the best of them because he is a main player where they were fleeting anxieties。 He's so fun to read， that it's no wonder that Shakespeare's play entirely focused on him became his first truly great History。 。。。more

Brittany Petruzzi ，

AKA The Tragedy of Queen Margaret and the Rise of King Richard III。 Seriously。 Richard （here "Glouchester"） and Margaret get some of Shakespeare's most underappreciated speeches。 Evem with Siri reading it to me （because of my vision issues）， I couldn't help the twisting in my guts at her final speech upon the brutal death of her son right before her eyes。 Add to that Richard setting us up for his machinations in Richard III and you've got a combo very satisfying conclusion to the Henry VI trilog AKA The Tragedy of Queen Margaret and the Rise of King Richard III。 Seriously。 Richard （here "Glouchester"） and Margaret get some of Shakespeare's most underappreciated speeches。 Evem with Siri reading it to me （because of my vision issues）， I couldn't help the twisting in my guts at her final speech upon the brutal death of her son right before her eyes。 Add to that Richard setting us up for his machinations in Richard III and you've got a combo very satisfying conclusion to the Henry VI trilogy and prologue to Richard III。 。。。more

Matthew Gurteen ，

A fantastic end to Henry VI's story。 I have greatly enjoyed reading all three parts over the past few months and look forward to continuing Richard's story next。 Although I rated all three parts five stars， this was easily the best。 It is plain to see Shakespeare's growing skill， and the drama flows from every page。 More so with the previous parts， I enjoyed Part Three more because it was less necessary to know who each character is。 I familiarised myself with Henry VI's life before picking this A fantastic end to Henry VI's story。 I have greatly enjoyed reading all three parts over the past few months and look forward to continuing Richard's story next。 Although I rated all three parts five stars， this was easily the best。 It is plain to see Shakespeare's growing skill， and the drama flows from every page。 More so with the previous parts， I enjoyed Part Three more because it was less necessary to know who each character is。 I familiarised myself with Henry VI's life before picking this part up anyway， but this play is more interested in the pointlessness of power changing than personal politics。 This theme of paper crowns made it much easier to follow and more akin to Shakespeare's tragedies in terms of enjoyment。 I made similar points in my review for Part Two， but I find Henry as a character so fascinating。 He is not given much time on the page than other characters despite his name being the title。 Instead， Shakespeare creates a tragically timid hero， happier when he is not in action than fighting。 Margeret， too， continues to hold a place in my heart as one of Shakespeare's best characters。 Her development from Part One to Part Three is truly masterful， and I am most excited to see where she continues next。 Richard's establishment in the narrative also took me by surprise in terms of enjoyment。 He is an often caricatured villain at the point， but it was great to see the beginnings of Shakespeare's character here。Overall， I am so glad that I have finally found an appreciation for Shakespeare's English history plays after struggling with them for so long。 Although readers may prefer to read the other parts first， in my opinion， that is not necessary to pick up this play。 I would recommend it to any Shakespeare fan。 。。。more

Braden ，

I agree with the general consensus that this is the worst of the King Henry VI plays。 There's a lot of fighting and a lot less time devoted to character。 Even Shakespeare himself may have gotten confused about who is on what side， because Montague switches sides without ever even saying anything about it （I only noticed this because it was on SparkNotes， which I use to get some more analysis out of my Shakespeare reading）。 However， this play nails the ending and it's a great transition to lead i I agree with the general consensus that this is the worst of the King Henry VI plays。 There's a lot of fighting and a lot less time devoted to character。 Even Shakespeare himself may have gotten confused about who is on what side， because Montague switches sides without ever even saying anything about it （I only noticed this because it was on SparkNotes， which I use to get some more analysis out of my Shakespeare reading）。 However， this play nails the ending and it's a great transition to lead into Richard III， which everybody says is much better than these Henry plays so I'm excited。 。。。more

Phillip ，

This is a seesaw of a play， where basically the balance of power between the houses of York and Lancaster shifts continually， with one side victorious and then the other。 The shifts happen based on things like who wins a battle， who convinces the king of France to side with them， which lords defect， etc。 Basically， it's a tough one to keep straight because you have to remember balances of power and who is on which side at any given moment。One thing I do find really striking about this play， howe This is a seesaw of a play， where basically the balance of power between the houses of York and Lancaster shifts continually， with one side victorious and then the other。 The shifts happen based on things like who wins a battle， who convinces the king of France to side with them， which lords defect， etc。 Basically， it's a tough one to keep straight because you have to remember balances of power and who is on which side at any given moment。One thing I do find really striking about this play， however， is that Richard， Duke of Gloucester shows a lot of the same character traits he will later show in Richard III。 So， if Richard III is pro-Tudor， anti-Yorkist propaganda （as many people would say it is）， then this play is clearly in the same vein。 In fact， a lot of the language Richard uses and the language used to describe him in this play is strikingly similar to the later play that bears his moniker。 For instance， there is discussion of Richard being hunchbacked and hideous， too ugly to love and he therefore must become a villain。 There is discussion of the horrible signs manifest at his birth。 He calculates very clearly how many people stand between him and the crown。 And he even murders Henry VI in the Tower at the end of the play。https://youtu。be/vNSwmn8Aoyk 。。。more

Robyn G。 ，

3。5

Colby Mcmurry ，

The final part of the trilogy is more concise and focused than its predecessors。 The main part of the War of the Roses comes to a bloody end as Shakespeare concentrates on the battles between the two sides。 A real standout character in this play for me was Queen Margaret who really takes charge in her own right in this play; a true proto-feminist character。 Shakespeare is able to bring in this trilogy for a solid landing with part 3。

Fran Corteggiano ，

La primera aparición de Ricardo es haciendo hablar a una cabeza decapitada。 Es， claramente el protagonista y el mejor personaje de esta tercera parte。

Katja ，

4 stars & 4/10 hearts。 Soooo I really feel very sorry for Henry， and I still don’t like Margaret or Prince Edward。 The horrors of the war are really very saddening。 Richard of Gloucester is terrible; Edward of York isn’t much better。 Warwick is a cunning old hypocritical sinner （though I understand his anger at Edward in part）。 Louis of France is actually decent; so is Elizabeth， surprisingly！ Basically， this shows what happens in civil war and when rebellion is indulged in… and ambition is wron 4 stars & 4/10 hearts。 Soooo I really feel very sorry for Henry， and I still don’t like Margaret or Prince Edward。 The horrors of the war are really very saddening。 Richard of Gloucester is terrible; Edward of York isn’t much better。 Warwick is a cunning old hypocritical sinner （though I understand his anger at Edward in part）。 Louis of France is actually decent; so is Elizabeth， surprisingly！ Basically， this shows what happens in civil war and when rebellion is indulged in… and ambition is wrongly encouraged。 Content: Murder; Edward attempt to seduce Elizabeth。 。。。more

Rachel ，

Hands down my favorite of the Henry 6 tetralogy。

Aubrey ，

This play is just musical chairs with the English throne。 It's honestly exhausting to read。 One minute Henry's in power， the next Edward's our man in London。 All of it feels so tedious， especially since NETHIER OF THESE CHARACTERS SHOULD BE KING。 Henry is so bland and useless， and Edward is an irrational horn-dog。 Why anyone would follow either of these guys， I could not guess， but people's inexplicable willingness to die for them is the driving force of this play。The Dukes and Earls become insu This play is just musical chairs with the English throne。 It's honestly exhausting to read。 One minute Henry's in power， the next Edward's our man in London。 All of it feels so tedious， especially since NETHIER OF THESE CHARACTERS SHOULD BE KING。 Henry is so bland and useless， and Edward is an irrational horn-dog。 Why anyone would follow either of these guys， I could not guess， but people's inexplicable willingness to die for them is the driving force of this play。The Dukes and Earls become insufferably annoying in this play as well。 They are so whiney and willy-nilly in their allegiances。 I swear to God， this guy Warwick changes sides three times over the course of series。 And each time he changes sides it's presented like some amazing revelation。 I cannot stand any of these people， and I found myself hoping for their untimely death just so they would permanently exit stage left。Just like in the previous two plays， pacing in Part 3 is confusing and bizarre。 Especially inter- and intra-scene pacing。 Practically no time passes during battle sequences， with some even appearing to occur at the same time as the scene before it。 However， there are other scenes that take literally years。 I'm not kidding。 There are scenes where a person starts a monologue in one year， and ends it in a another。 It's an interesting way to tell the audience that time has passed， but it's almost impossible to appreciate without actually seeing someone perform it。Not a great play， but a satisfying end to the Henry VI series and a nice set up for Richard III。 。。。more

Dane Cobain ，

And so we come to an end。 I think that the first play in the trilogy was the strongest of the three， although this one comes second and then the middle one was mostly filler。There’s not too much else for me to say， really， because everything that there is to cover has already been covered in my other reviews。 It might be more for you if you’re into historical stuff， but I don’t like kings and queens。

Dearbhla ，

Digested via the Chop Bard podcast。

Scout ，

I wrote a whole other review and then Goodreads ate it。。。。 oh well。 The basics are: surprisingly good play， makes Richard III into an even better play， wish it had a different title so people would actually perform it。Seriously， though， I’ve always been a bit dissatisfied by Richard’s character arc in Richard III， and I’ve now realized it’s because that play starts part of the way through his story。 Henry VI Part 3， in addition to a lot of other good stuff， goes a long way towards making Richard I wrote a whole other review and then Goodreads ate it。。。。 oh well。 The basics are: surprisingly good play， makes Richard III into an even better play， wish it had a different title so people would actually perform it。Seriously， though， I’ve always been a bit dissatisfied by Richard’s character arc in Richard III， and I’ve now realized it’s because that play starts part of the way through his story。 Henry VI Part 3， in addition to a lot of other good stuff， goes a long way towards making Richard seem more like a real person figuring out where he fits into the world， and it does that mostly by giving more time to the relationship between the three sons of York。 Not that it makes him sympathetic， lol。 But it explains him more。Lots of good stuff as always from King Henry （the molehill speech and death prophecy） and Margaret （just her whole vibe）。 Four battles， which is maybe a bit much。 Lots of people changing allegiance on a dime。 Probably Shakespeare’s biggest play for on-screen child murder。 。。。more

Chris Maddix ，

Shakespeare wrote King Henry VI in three parts。 I think it can be assumed that Shakespeare wished to cover the War of the Roses in depth。 He also， no doubt saw a chance to illustrate the differences between the gentle King Henry VI and his father， one of England’s greatest warriors， as well as the distinctions between peaceable Henry VI and his combative wife。 In Henry VI Part Two， the Duke of York has replaced Henry on the throne。 Henry VI Part Three opens in London with York in charge。 Henry a Shakespeare wrote King Henry VI in three parts。 I think it can be assumed that Shakespeare wished to cover the War of the Roses in depth。 He also， no doubt saw a chance to illustrate the differences between the gentle King Henry VI and his father， one of England’s greatest warriors， as well as the distinctions between peaceable Henry VI and his combative wife。 In Henry VI Part Two， the Duke of York has replaced Henry on the throne。 Henry VI Part Three opens in London with York in charge。 Henry again demonstrates his gentle nature and his desire to avoid conflict by agreeing to a York proposal – Henry can retain the throne， but when he dies， the House of York takes over。 This， of course， enrages Queen Margaret， who wants their son， Prince Edward， to rule。 Queen Margaret heads for France to gain help from French King Louis XI。 In persuading King Henry that warfare can be avoided if Henry’s descendants do not rule， York has devised a good plan， but son Richard points out the weakness of it – King Henry can go back on it at any time。 Though Henry is reticent to do this， his cohorts are likely to talk him into it。 In fact， Queen Margaret immediately raises an army and makes ready to fight。Richard Plantagenet， the Duke of York， works long and hard， through all 3 parts of Shakespeare’s King Henry VI to gain the throne， but he never quite establishes himself， eventually being killed by a warrior named Clifford （whose father Clifford was killed by York at the Battle of St。 Alban’s （Henry VI Part Two）） and also stabbed by Queen Margaret。 With the death of the duke， his eldest son， Edward IV takes over as king and holds the throne until midway through the succeeding play， Richard III。 Richard III （known as Richard or Gloucester in this play）， for his part， spends much time plotting to become king through the elimination of family members。 This tough guy named Clifford was recruited by Queen Margaret， and one of his first acts is to track down and kill Rutland， the second son of Plantagenet， Edward’s younger brother。 The queen’s forces then move on to York’s castle， find York， kill him， cut off his head， and use it to adorn the gate。 Nobody ever said these folks were nice。 Meanwhile， shift the scene to Plantagenet’s sons， Edward （there are too many Edwards and Dukes of York in this play， so at this point Edward is temporarily known by his actual title， the Earl of March） and Richard， who are nearby， wondering what has become of their father。 A messenger brings the news of both deaths， York and Rutland， and brave Warwick arrives with news of reinforcements。 So how should Edward and Richard avenge their father？ Edward tries the direct approach， going before Henry and Margaret and demanding that they kneel。 Of course， that method goes nowhere， and they are forced to fight in a place called Towton。 Through all of this， Henry VI is the reluctant warrior。 He’s sorry that York was beheaded。 He tries to prevent any battle， but the opposing factions prevail。 His wife and Clifford actually try to get him to leave because they will fight better without him， but Henry remains。 When the Battle at Towton starts to go against the king’s forces， they finally talk him into seeking safety and escaping with Exeter。 Henry is soon thereafter captured by soldiers loyal to Edward。In London， Edward has assumed his place as king。 Among his first orders of business is meeting with Lady Jane Grey; she has lost her husband and is pleading for recovery of her property。 King Edward throws her a curve ball; he asks her to marry him， and she agrees。 At this point in the play Shakespeare takes extraordinary efforts to show King Edward as a ladies’ man。 Edward runs into a big problem， however。 He has already dispatched Warwick to Paris to propose marriage， on his behalf， to Bona， daughter of King Louis XI。 As the proposal is being posed， a messenger arrives and informs the French king that Edward already married Lady Jane Grey。 This does not go over well。 The Paris palace crowd is so incensed that they agree to join forces to dethrone Edward – loyal soldier Warwick included。 They even get George， the Duke of Clarence and Edward’s brother， to join in overthrowing Edward。 Warwick returns to England， quickly locates Edward， captures him， leaves him with Warwick’s brother for safeguarding， but Edward escapes。 Warwick also frees King Henry。 Henry， in turn， offers to allow Warwick to govern the country。 Warwick agrees to share the reign with Clarence。 Earlier， Henry seemed ready to let York govern; this time he’s ready to hand control to Warwick and Clarence。 This is clearly a king who does not want to be in charge。King Edward makes his way to King Henry， captures him， and puts him in the Tower。 Warwick， Oxford， Clarence and others are marshalling forces， so Edward attacks Warwick before they can all gather。 While Edward and Warwick are chatting about who should be king， the rest of the forces arrive， but Clarence comes to his senses and rejoins his brothers。The final battle for control takes place near Tewksbury。 Queen Margaret has arrived with reinforcements from France but has lost half of them at sea。 Margaret’s best fighters， Warwick and Montague， are killed。 With the deaths of Warwick and Montague， the margin of victory swings in Edward’s direction。 Prince Edward， son of Henry VI and Margaret， finds courage that Henry VI never had， but is killed for his efforts。 Queen Margaret is shipped off to France， Richard sneaks off to the Tower and murders King Henry， thus setting the stage for Richard to betray his brothers and become king in Richard III。 。。。more

Melanie ，

Interesting

Emma ，

I would revisit Richard III mostly because of the connection to The Eyre Affair。 But the rest of these: probably not。 I assume reading in order would have helped。 But how much？

Michael Giovinco ，

This a play of constant portrayals and war， definitely the hardest plot to follow。

Andy ，

I should be doing University work but I couldn't be bothered， so I decided to read some plays today since they're short-ish to read。I found Part 1 to be alright， Part 2 was just boring， but this Part （Part 3） is definitely the best part。 Its also quite funny how much stabbing there is。 It reminds me of that SNL skit with Andy Samberg and Bill Hader where they keep shooting each other very dramatically。 This play has so much death to the point where a female character even says "O' Kill me too！"。 I should be doing University work but I couldn't be bothered， so I decided to read some plays today since they're short-ish to read。I found Part 1 to be alright， Part 2 was just boring， but this Part （Part 3） is definitely the best part。 Its also quite funny how much stabbing there is。 It reminds me of that SNL skit with Andy Samberg and Bill Hader where they keep shooting each other very dramatically。 This play has so much death to the point where a female character even says "O' Kill me too！"。I haven't read the Henriad which is set before this series， but I highly doubt it can beat the absurdity of this play。 。。。more

Kat ，

I mean。。。。where else in Shakespeare does someone say "and thou misshapen dick" and promptly get stabbed？ I mean。。。。where else in Shakespeare does someone say "and thou misshapen dick" and promptly get stabbed？ 。。。more

Leslie ，

This 3rd play about King Henry VI wasn't as enjoyable for me as the first 2。 Perhaps it is because， as an American， I didn't learn about these people as a child but I struggled with the fact that although the events in the play covered ~10 years， there were few markers about time passing。 I also noted the Tudor bias about Richard of Gloucester and many of the other Planteganets much more in this one。I listened to the LibriVox full cast audiobook which was good though a few of the minor character This 3rd play about King Henry VI wasn't as enjoyable for me as the first 2。 Perhaps it is because， as an American， I didn't learn about these people as a child but I struggled with the fact that although the events in the play covered ~10 years， there were few markers about time passing。 I also noted the Tudor bias about Richard of Gloucester and many of the other Planteganets much more in this one。I listened to the LibriVox full cast audiobook which was good though a few of the minor characters were a little hard to follow。 Luckily I was reading along in my Kindle omnibus "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare"！ 。。。more

Jake ，

Only so many times kings can be deposed and reinstated and lords can switch sides before it gets a little tiresome。

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Henry VI, Part Three

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Henry VI, Part Three&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Henry VI, Part Three&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0