TO KILL A KING

PART 1
1. Shakespeare Makes a Choice
Macbeth, is a bloody play with murder, ghosts and magic. The story also contains madness, battles
and prophecies. If this sounds a bit like Shakespeare’s version of Game of Thrones your thinking
wouldn’t be that far off, minus a dragon or three. In fact, the creators of Game of Thrones were
probably partly inspired by Macbeth, Shakaspeare’s tale of a man who murdered his way onto the
throne.
Many audinces who have watched Macbeth, one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays, would not
have realized Macbeth is based on a true story. At first glance, King Macbeth’s story seems like an
odd choice for Shakespeare to immortalize onstage. King Macbeth ruled in medieval Scotland. He
died in 1057, which was almost 500 years before Shakespeare was born. Many kings, queens and
popes made a bigger impact on world history than King Macbeth of Sotland. Even among medieval
Scottish kings, Macbeth wasn’t particularly famous.
Also, don’t forget that Shakespeare was trying to draw in an audience for his play. Like studio
executives who make movies and television shows today, Shakespeare would have hoped to write a
script that people wanted to watch. A play about a random, long-dead king from Scotland doesn’t
sound like a bestseller. Wouldn’t it have been smarter for Shakespeare to write a play about a
different king? He could have chosen to write about someone his audience might have heard at some
point. Instead, he chose to write about King Macbeth, and the play went on to be wildly succesful.
So, let’s examine why was Shakespeare so fascinated with this Scottish king.

II. The Real History of King Macbeth

The first and easiest answer to this question is the real King Macbeth’s story is quite a thriller. The
real King Macbeth did not gain the throne in the typcal way of European kings. Most royals were the
sons and daughters of other royals. Occasionally, lesser nobles like earls or dukes married into the
royal line of succession. However, King Macbeth of Scotland did not achive power through birthright
or marriage. His path to the throne was simpler and a bit more sinister. King Macbeth waged war,
killed a king and gained the throne. Even today, audiences love stroies about ruthless people willing
to kill to get what they want. From Game of Thrones to The Walking Dead and Pretty Little Liars,
stories of murderers fill television programming.
Historical details from the medieval period tentd to be a little vague as there was relatievely little
output in terms of documentation , literature and culture during this time. However, most scholars
believe King Macbeth was born in Scotland around 1005. His grandfather, King Malcolm II died in
1034. According to the line of succession, Malcolm II’s eldest grandson, Duncan became King of
Scotland. Unfortunately, Duncan was a weak and ineffectieve ruler. A few years into Duncan’s reign,
Macbeth assembled an army against Duncan in hopes of seizing power. King Duncan died in battle
and Duncan’s sons fled the country. Macbeth stood victorious as the man with the strongest claim to
the throne.
Macbeth, became King of Scotland and ruled for 17 years. These 17 years were filled with relative
peace and stability until Duncan’s oldest son returned to Scotland with an army at his back. Duncan’s
son, also named Malcolm, claimed the throne as Duncan’s heir. Their armies met in battle in 1057.
Macbeth was killed and Malcolm the III ascended the Scottish throne.
III. How Shakespeare Embellished History
If you have already read Macbeth, a lot of that history would have sounded familiar. In Shakespeare’s
Macbeth, Macbeth, an army general and nobleman, kills King Duncan to gain the throne. In the play,
Duncan’s sons return to the country to avenge their father and reclaim the crown. Like the real
Scottish king, Macbeth dies in that battle. From there, Shakespeare took this already dramatic stroy
and, with his creativity as a playwright , embellished it.
At his first step, Shakespeare eliminated those 17 years of peace from his version of the story. The
challenges to Macbeth’s throne in the play come much faster than in the historical record. This is a
classic storytellling tecnique that writers still employ today. No audience wants to watch the boring
bits. Writers want to end every episode with a cliffhanger so that their viewers click ahead to the next
episode.
Also, in the play, as opposed to history, there is very little evidence that Macbeth made a good king.
During the reign of the actual King Macbeth, Scotland was so politically stable that the real King
Macbeth was able to leave country for an extented period of time to visit the pope in Rome. Don’t
forget that in the 11th century, King Macbeth would have traveled to Rome with medieval methods
of transportation. Getting to Rome from Scotland would not have been a quick jaunt. The journey
would have taken months. King Macbeth was so unworried about threats to his political power that he
left the country unattended and his throne unoccupied. In the play, Macbeth can barely leave the
dinner table without someone challenging his claim to the throne.
To heighten the dramatic tension, Shakespeare altered the circumstances around King Duncan’s
death. Unlike the historical figure, Macbeth of Shakespeare’s play does not murder Duncan on the
battlefield. Instead, the audience gets to watch Macbeth and his wife Lady Macbeth plot King
Duncan’s murder. The couple invites King Duncan into their home as a royal guest, they drug his
guards and then the audience wathces as Macbeth stabs Duncan in his sleep. This isn’t the only
murder Macbeth plots. After he gains the throne in the play, Macbeth, unlike the historical king, hires
assassins to commit more murders on his behalf in order to consolidate his power.
There is a vast difference between death on the battlefield and premeditated murder. Death on the
battlefield , especially in the 11th century Scotland, was a relatively common fate, even for kings. In
fact, the actions of historical Macbeth followed the ‘proper’ etiquette of the time period for nobles
hoping to usurp the throne. The historical King Macbeth did not enact a secret plot to commit
murder. Instead, King Macbeth issued a formal challenge to the current king and raised an army with
order members of the Scottish nobility who supported his cause. Then, Macbeth met Duncan in battle.
In comparison, Shakespeare painted his version of King Macbeth as a cold, calculating and
bloodthirsty man capable of murdering a man his sleep. He behaves, not like a proper general , but
like the Evil Queen in Snow White, hiring assasins and wielding a knife like a poisened apple.
IV. How Shakespeare Further Embellished History with Magic
The motivations for killing King Duncan are perhaps the biggest difference between the historical
record of 11th century Scotland and Shakespeare’s play. As far as history is concerned, the real King
Macbeth had a claim to the throne. His grandfather Malcolm II had been the king and his older cousin
Duncan , who was the first in the line of succesion, was not a good ruler. In the play, King Duncan is
not presented as imcompetent at all. In fact, Shakespeare portrayed Duncan as a great king, kind and
loyal. Shakespeare might as well have had Macbeth kill the audience’s favorite teddy bear.
Shakespeare swapped the real king Macbeth’s rather reasonable motivations to usurp the throne for
something spookier and far more mysterious. He adds magic to the story in the form of witches and
prophecies. This magic serves as Macbeth’s motivation to seize power.
At the opening play after a succesful battle as a general in th king’s army, Macbeth encounters the
Weird Sisters. These three witches predict that Macbeth will become Thane of Cawdor ( a Scottish
noble) and then become king. The witches also predict that Banquo, a fellow general, will never
ascend the throne, but his descendants will. Both Macbeth and Banquo reject these prophecies as
nonsense at first, but then an initial element of their predictions come true –King Duncan names
Macbeth the Thane of Cawdor, just as the witches stated he would . This proof of the witches magical
prowess is all Macbeth needs to put his faith in the withces claims.
From the moment, Macbeth imagines the rest of the prophecy coming true and ascending the throne.
He takes drastic steps in order to accomplish this, namely killing Duncan to gain power and later
arranging the murders of Banquo’s descendants will attain the throne. According to Shakespeare,
Macbeth’s motivations to usurp the throne are born of his mad ambition to fulfill a magical prophecy.
If you have read the Harry Potter series, you might recognize this motivation as the very reason
Voldemort tries to kill an infant Harry Potter.

V. How Shakespeare Embellished History with a Powerful Woman

Shakespeare also amended history when he created the character Lady Macbeth. The historical King
Macbeth of Scotland did have a wife named Gruoch, whose lineage helped the king solidify his
power. Like Macbeth, Gruoch was also the grandchild of a former Scottish king. The historical
records contain scant additional details about how Gruoch helped Macbeth attain supremacy over
Scotland. Shakespeare filled in the historical record in creating Lady Macbeth, a woman whose
ambition surpasses even her husband’s. When Lady Macbeth hears the prophecy, she becomes intent
on propelling her husband to becoming king. Alongside her husband, she plots to kill Duncan. When
Macbeth wavers in his desire to murder, Lady Macbeth pushes him through flattery, manipulation and
threats to follow through with their plan. In Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, Shakespeare created two
flawed heroes whose ambitious lead them to commit regicide, the murder of a king. Shakespeare
created a trend here. When a married couple, fictional or real, behaves in a particularly ruthless way,
they often get compared to Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. One recent example is Tonya Harding, an
Olympic figure skater whose husband hired someone to bash in the knee of her biggest competition.
This story gripped national headlines and was turned into an Oscar-winning movie.

PART 2
VI. Why Did Shakespeare Make These Changes?
In asking why Shakespeare decided not only to tell Macbeth’s story, but also to embellish it in the
ways he did, one interesting factor to consider is the timing of king Duncan’s murder. Duncan’s
murder is an exciting moment of onstage drama, but it does not happen anywhere near the climax of
the play. In fact, Macbeth stabs Duncan in Act 2, Scene 2, less than halfway through this five –act
play. Therefore, the main action of the play cannot be Duncan’s death or Macbeth’s rise to power.
There are too many scenes of the play left to go. It would be like claiming your school day was over
when you were still an hour from lunch.
In the latter half of the play, Macbeth and his wife scramble to keep their newly attained power, but
the guilt of committing these murders threatens to crush both of them. Lady Macbeth descends into
madness. The audience witness her hallucinating, scrubbing imaginary blood from her hands as she
famously shouts, ‘‘ Out, damned spot!’’ Macbeth does not fare any better. Banquo’s murdered ghosts
and visions of bloody daggers haunt him. Neither Macbeth or Lady Macbeth achieve anything
remotely close to a happy ending. Lady Macbeth commits suicide and Macbeth ends up headless after
his final battle. At the end of every performance of Macbeth, the audience would witness the horrible
fates of this power-mad, ambitious couple that committed murder to wrestle power from a king.

VI.How 17th Century British Politics Found Echoes in Macbeth

To understand the impact the deaths of these king-killers on the audience of Shakespeare’s day, we
must examine what was happening in Britain when Shakespeare wrote this play in 1606. Although
most of the Shakespeare’s audience would not have known who King Macbeth of 11th century
Scotland was, the entire audience would have known the name of their current king, King James
I.King James assumed power in 1603. Before James, Britain had not had a new monarch in quite
some time. Queen Elizabeth I ruled Britain for 44 stable and prosperous years. Typical high school
students in America have lived through four presidential elections. Teeanagers ( and people in theirs
20s, 30s, and 40s ) living during Queen Elizabeth’s region would have never known life in British
under another ruler.
Queen Elizbeth died in 1603 without naming an heir. She famously never married. In fact, she is
sometimes known as the Virgin Queen. She left behind no direct descendants, nieces or nephews.
Instead, power was passed down to James I, distant cousins of Elizabeth’s.
James transition to power wasn’t smooth. Many nobkes objected to James assuming power because
they believed they had stronger claims to the throne. Furthmore, James was Scottish, and Scotland
had a long thistory of struggling for independence from Britain. Countries have lines of succession for
a reason. If a President dies, a Vice President will assume power. Could you imagine if instead of a
Vice President, the president’s third or fourth cousin became President instead? What if that cousin
was a different nationality?
To complicate matters, James’s mother, Mary of Queen of Scots once plotted to have Elizabeth
outsted from power in hopes that she could gain the throne for herself. Mary hoped to restore
Catholicism to Britain, a Protestant nation. Elizabeth uncovered the plot, imprisoned Mary and had
her executed. Although James was a Protestant, many British nobles feared he would folllow in his
mother’s footsteps and enforce Catholicism in England. There were still those who wanted Britain to
return to Catholism , through , and they were dissapointed when James did not demonstratre Catholic
sympathies. So, James I was ruling over discontented factions of people, some with a lot of money
and political ambitions who were scheming to capture the throne.
This political situation is enchoed beautifully in Macbeth. Shakespeare’s audience would have
watched warring factions wrangle for control of Scotland onstage. Some of the audience members
would have been the same ambitious, discontented nobles who wanted James out of power. In the
play, the audience would have seen a stark reality portrayed onstage of what happens when people
dare to overthrow a king. After all, when Macbeth kills the king, Scotland is thrown into the chaos of
war.
Although Britain did not break out into a full-scale the war, the country tipped perilously close to the
fate of Scotland in Macbeth. In 1605, one year before Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, King James and
his allies uncovered the Gunpowder Plot. The Gunpowder Plot involved Guy Fawkes and other fellow
Catholics who were caught attempting to blow up Parliament with James inside. The Gunpowder Plot
and other conspiracies would have given Macbeth a ‘‘ripped from the headlines’’feel for its audience.
In some ways, Macbeth would have felt like an episode of Law and Order.

VII.Macbeth as Shakespeare’s Love Letter to King James I

In writing Macbeth, Shakespeare took a political stand. He threw his support behind James I as the
rightful king and displayed no sympathy for citizens plotting to usurp the throne. Shakespeare’s
message of support for King James was intended not only for the audience but also for James himself.
Royal patrogane was important for Shakespeare. Shakespeare and his company performed for
Elizabeth’s court when she was alive. When James came into power, Shakespeare’s company honored
the new King by changing their name to the ‘‘King’s Men.’’ For Shakespeare to continue producing
theatre, he would have wanted to maintain the king’s favor. What better way to accomplish this than
to use his play to depict his broad support of James‘ regin? Artists use this same approach today.
Think about rappers writing songs about how much they love New York City and then performing
those songs to crowds who live in New York City. In this own way, Shakespeare was behaving in the
same way.
Shakespeare used the text of Macbeth to flatter the new king. Unlike many nobles at James’ court and
most of Shakespeare’s audience of Londoners. King James I was Scottish. Before he was crowned
King James I of Britain, he was the king of Scotland and came from a long line of Scottish monarchy.
It is hardly suprising that Shakespeare chose to write this play about Scottish Kings for a Scottish
King. In fact, King James, claimed his family could trace their heritage all the way back to Banquo,
Mcabeth’s fellow general and nobleman. Don’t forget Shakespeare made Banquo the subject of the
witches’ prohecy in Act 1, ‘‘ thou [Banquo] shalt get kings, though thou be none.’’ In this line, the
witches predict that Banquo will not become a king himself, but his future descendants will be kings.
This line of kings descended from Banquo would include James I.

Later in the play, Shakespeare reinforced this idea that Banquo’s descendants would include a long
line of kings when Banquo’s ghost appears. Macbeth in a fit of grief and fury exclaims to the
ghost.’’What, will the line strecth out to th’ crack of doom?’’ Banquo’s ghost will not leave Macbeth
in peace , and neither will this promised ‘’line’ of his descendants. This idea haunts Macbeth for a
simple reason. If Banquo’s children and grandchildren gain power in Scotland, Macbeth will lose his
power. Macbeth fears this line of Banquo’s descendants will continue haunting him until ‘’the track of
doom.’’ This is yet another aim of flattery towards King James, since James was a part of that ancient
line of kings that will stretch forever, until doomsday.
The play’s obsession with witchcraft, magic, and prophecy is another nod to King James, who was
fascinated with subject. Macbeth’s witches drive the plot forward. They cultivate Macbeth’s ambition
and put the imagines of greatness and kingship in his head. The temptation to fulfill their prophecy
leads Macbeth to kill Duncan. Many of other plays Shakespeare wrote contain magical or supernatural
elements. A Midsummer Night’s Dream, for example, contains fairies, potent magical flowers and
spirits. Written during the reign of Queen Elizbeth, Midsummer presents a view of magic as
lighthearted, comedic force of good. In that play, magic is responsible for the happy ending. Macbeth
prsesents a wildly different view of magic. It is a dark force a temptation. It leads Macbeth to murder.
This darker view of magic was consistent with King James’ beliefs. King James famous in his hatred
and persecution of witches. He even wrote a book called Daemonologie about the evils of witchcraft
while he was the King of Scotland. Shakespeare curried King James’ favor in the same way you
might if you wrote a paper for your English class about your teacher’s favorite subject.

VIII. Macbeth’s Lasting Legacy

Shakespeare wrote Macbeth in part to reflect the modern political turmoil in Britain and to flatter the
new king, James I. He used an old story of a Scottish king who connived his way onto the throne to
present social commentary about attemps to disrupt the line of succession in Britain in 1606. Now,
over 400 years later, Macbeth remains one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays.
Macbeth has been adapted countless times on the stage and screen. Scholars have written hundreds of
books about it and translated it into many languages. References to Macbeth crop up everywhere in
pop culture . In the film Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, a chorus of wizard children sing,
‘‘Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.’’ These lyrics are a direct
quotation of Macbeth’s three witches, surrounded by their cauldron in Act IV, Scene 1. Broadway’s
Hamilton also includes many references to Macbeth’s most famous soliloquy, ‘’Tomorrow and
tomorrow creeps in this petty pace from day to day.’’ In this song, Alexander Hamilton, who is part
Scottish, compares himself to Macbeth, calling himself another ‘‘Scottish tragedy.’’
Perhaps Shakespeare’s play captivated future audiences simply because he wove a great tale of a man
whose overwhelming ambition led him to a disastrous end. When people watch this story today in
films and onstage, they probably do not think about King James, the Gunpowder plot and other
intrigues of the 17th century British court. Unless they are medieval scholars, audiences of Macbeth
probably do not consider the real Scottish king who mustered an army against his cousin to usurp the
throne. Instead, audiences watch this story of a man grappling with his desire for power and
abandoning his morals to achieve it. Macbeth’s story continues to resonate with auduiences because
his struggle is a universal one. No matter the era, Macbeth always reminds the audience of someone.
In every country, there are political, religious and cultural leaders who struggle as Macbeth did. Their
names appear in newspaper headlines and on television. When these leaders let their ambitions dictate
their actions instead of their humanity, communities suffer. People watching Macbeth today might
think of corrupt, greedy political leaders who are preventing funds from going to hurricane relief in
Puerto Rico or fixing the water syststem in Flint, Michigan. The genius of Macbeth is whatever the
time period, the play allows the audience to witness their own society through the lens of a tragic
Scottish king.