Shakespeare, genetics, malformations, and the Wars of the Roses: hereditary themes in Henry VI and Richard III.

The four plays in the Henry VI-Richard III sequence well illustrate Shakespeare's recognition of hereditary influences upon the human condition. The inheritance of physical characteristics as manifest particularly by resemblance between fathers and sons is noted frequently. The absence of such resemblance is cited occasionally as evidence of illegitimacy. Personality traits are also viewed as inherited, although less consistently and there are important exceptions. Physical and mental traits when not derived from parents are ascribed to "nature" in the sense in which the term is often used today. Such traits are seen as being congenital or inborn even if not obviously "hereditary." Important exceptions to this are provided by the characters of the two lead characters in the play sequence. The weak-willed Henry VI is markedly different from his father, grandfather, and son who were all valiant, warlike, and brave. Shakespeare never explains this abrupt difference among generations. And the source of the evil character of Richard III is somewhat ambiguous. It seems most likely that in the first three plays of the sequence Shakespeare intended Richard's villainousness to be perceived as innate, caused by the same forces of nature that produced Richard's deformities (which are not further explained). But when Shakespeare wrote Richard III and gave more conscious consideration to what was now his central character he invoked an "environmentalist" explanation. Richard now is presented, albeit somewhat inconsistently, as evil in response to social ostracism because of his ugly deformities. This rather modern interpretation of the social origins of the personality of the deformed is particularly striking because it goes beyond anything in Shakespeare's historical sources, although Francis Bacon, a contemporary of Shakespeare, also recognized the effect of social forces upon the personality of the deformed.