Question this most bloody piece of work: Developing the Myth of Macbeth

 Little is known in regards to the historical Macbeth, particularly in comparison to his dramatical counterpart made famous by Shakespeare’s play The Tragedy of Macbeth.  It is generally accepted amongst historians that he was born around 1005, became king of Scots in 1040 and ruled somewhat successfully until his death in 1057.  What is known of the historical Macbeth and his reign is limited to only a handful of contemporary and near-contemporary sources.  The most extensive of which is The Prophecy of Berchán, which surmises Macbeth’s kingship in three short stanzas; the least extensive of which is the Verse Chronicle in which Macbeth and his reign are the subject of only two lines.

Despite these short, often laconic, references to Macbeth in these medieval sources, Macbeth is probably the most well known medieval king of Scots- thanks predominantly to Shakespeare’s Macbeth.  However, despite Shakespeare’s Macbeth being by far the most famous of the Macbeth narratives, Shakespeare’s narrative relied heavily on earlier sources and added little in terms of plot or characters to the narrative).  Shakespeare drew heavily on works such as Holinshed’s Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland which in turn drew heavily from earlier chronicle sources, which in turn had relied on earlier medieval sources.  Each subsequent retelling of the narrative adding and omitting from its predecessor until the narrative ultimately presented by Shakespeare in the 17th century bore little resemblance to historical events and figures.  From the just and good king depicted within fragmentary medieval sources, a complete and embellished narrative depicting Macbeth as a murderous tyrant developed during the six centuries following Macbeth’s death in 1057.  

This development is clear and linear, earlier sources such as The Prophecy of Berchán depict Macbeth positively and as time progresses the sources begin to not only embellish the narrative but also begin to portray Macbeth in an increasingly negative light.  Perhaps the largest shift in the narrative can be found in John of Fordun’s the Chronicle of the Scottish People and Walter Bower’s Scotichronicon (the latter relied heavily on the former, often copying sentences and even entire paragraphs verbatim from Fordun’s Chronicle). Both Fordun’s Chronicle and the Scotichronicon depict Duncan being murdered by Macbeth, rather than Duncan being killed in battle.  The Scotichronicon states that Duncan ‘was killed through...wickedness’ of his family (Duncan and Macbeth were cousins) and ‘fatally wounded in secret’ by Macbeth.

During the early modern period the myth of Macbeth is developed even further, both in Scottish and English historical writings.  In Boece’s Scotorum Historiae,  Boece builds upon Fordun and Bower’s narratives extensively: introducing characters and events that are not found in any earlier surviving sources.  Many of these additions, such as the character of Banquo become integral elements of the Macbeth narrative and are carried forward both into Holinshed’s Chronicles and Shakespeare’s Macbeth.  These narrative shifts, the omissions and embellishments that are present in each retelling of the narrative move the understanding of Macbeth and his kingship further from the historical and closer towards the mythological to the point where they are indistinguishable from one and other, and with the popularity of Shakespeare’s Macbeth cementing this final mythologised form of the narrative in popular understanding- the historical truth has essentially been overwritten by dramatical fiction.

Ultimately Shakespeare did not make Macbeth a tyrant, nor was he solely responsible for destroying the reputation of the historical Macbeth but Shakespreare’s Macbeth did ensure, perhaps inadvertently, that the true history of Macbeth and his kingship would be permanently obscured.

By Kelly McRae @KellMcRea (Twitter) 

MA History Allumni 

Image: The firste Volume of the Chronicles of England, Scotlande, and Irelande (1577), BL G.6006-7.