In the light of the growing controversy over the ‘political’ ambition of law and literature, perhaps the least controversial area in which it can be suggested that literature is of value in legal studies is that of legal history. I would suggest that the study of historical literature as an educative supplement to the study of law in history is unarguable. Rather curiously, perhaps, it is not an approach which has attracted much attention from the law and literature scholars whom we have already discussed. Possibly this is precisely because of its relatively uncontroversial, and un-philosophical, perspective. This is not to say, of course, that historical literature has not already been used precisely as such a supplement. There are numerous examples of such usage. Potentially the richest of such sources is, of course, Shakespeare. Again, Shakespeare is certainly not virgin territory for the law and literature student. The comedies in particular have already been much used as a mechanism for readdressing such familiar jurisprudential concepts as justice. In a more legal historical vein, Hamlet has been used as a vehicle for studying the law of homicide, Henry V for the study of international law in medieval and early modern Europe, and a whole range of plays, including comedies and histories, for an exploration of the controversy which surrounded the Oath of Allegiance and the role of ecclesiastical courts in the effecting of the Elizabethan Settlement.