Often, when writing historical novels, authors take creative liberties in their works. William Shakespeare was no different when he wrote his historical plays. In Shakespeare's English Kings, Peter Saccio discusses such discrepancies. Throughout this essay the degree of victimization of King Richard II will be explored. As Saccio points out, “Richard was the victim of multiple betrayals in Wales, while Shakespeare's Richard, though in a difficult position, is challenged by more honorable adversaries and accompanied by more loyal supporters” (Saccio 30). The article will pursue an answer to the purpose of Shakespeare's changing of history in Richard II and analyze how such changes affect the play. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay First, it is important to outline the discrepancies, that is, compare real figures with Shakespeare's characters in light of their relationships with Richard. According to Saccio, Northumberland promises Richard in Conway that Bolingbroke would allow him to keep his crown and power in exchange for his rightful inheritance, but then ambushes the king when he arrives (Saccio 29). Shakespeare uses Northumberland in his role as Bolingbroke's messenger; however, the playwright leaves out the ambush entirely. Instead, Richard willingly comes to Bolingbroke's call, knowing that his reign as king is over. He remarks to his cousin Aumerle: “What must the king do now? Must he submit? / The king will do it. Should he be deposed? / The king will be happy” (3.3.143 – 45). For all his loyalty to the play, however, the real Aumerle was a traitor. The king's cousin accompanied Richard II to Ireland, delayed his return and it was he who advised the division and dismissal of the army. After effectively diminishing Richard's force, Aumerle went to Bolingbroke (Saccio 29). Furthermore, one of the more peripheral figures, Thomas Percy, Northumberland's brother, never appears in Richard II. Rather, he is often mentioned by other characters, and is said to have defected to Bolingbroke after Northumberland was declared a traitor: "The Earl of Worcester / Has broken his staff, has resigned his office, / And all the servants are fled with him / To Bolingbroke” (2.2.58 – 61). In the story, Percy deserts Richard II at the same time as Aumerle (Saccio 30) was calculated to influence the public's perception of King Richard II. Shakespeare portrays Richard II as a flowery and luxurious man, with an almost sinister undertone: it is strongly implied that he ordered the death of his uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, and a propensity for making bad decisions tendency to rely not on himself, but on his contested divine right, which ultimately falls apart. Attempts to force others to understand that his rule is sanctioned by God and promises divine punishment to those who betray him; however, Richard also has moments of doubt where he feels abandoned by God or that his divine rule is non-existent. He laments: “Throw away respect, / tradition, form and ceremonious duty; / Because all this time you've always misunderstood me. / I live on bread like you, I feel the need, I taste the pain, / I need friends. Submissive like this, / How can you tell me I am a king?” (3.2.172 – 77). The only one besides Richard, it seems, who supports the sanctity of God's chosen king is Carlisle. In both the story and the play he protests Bolingbroke's usurpation of the throne, although Shakespeare certainly added his own theatricality to the matter. Probably, the opinions of both, 2000.