Mac Bethad mac Findlaich vs. Shakespearean Macbeth Essay Example

King Macbeth was brought to many people's attention in his very own popular play “The Tragedy of Macbeth.” Macbeth in the play was a vile man with a bad attitude, and had many horrible characteristics. However, Historical Macbeth (Mac Bethad mac Findláich) was a great man with a lot of good characteristics. Mac Bethad mac Findláich was barely even an influence on the creation of the Shakespearean Macbeth.

To begin, Macbeth’s relationships with people are different in multiple ways. The historical Macbeth found his wife after the death of her husband, and he also gained a stepson named Lulach.  In spite of that, Shakespeare wrote a story about a man who was first married to a woman just known as Lady Macbeth, and states that they have no children, nor will they ever.  “Mabeth was the newest king of Moray married to a widow named Grouch. Macbeth was killed by Malcolm II and his son Lulach took a claim for the high kingship.” (Barnes-Brown) Also, Macbeth having a son does not fit with the story Shakespeare was trying to portray because some of the motives that Macbeth has is the fact they witches told him he wouldn’t have an heir. However, the historical Macbeth not only had an heir, but also had his stepson named Lulach, and he ruled for seven months until slain by Malcolm's agents (Ohio State). Macbeth’s best friend Banquo also does not exist in reality. In the play Banquo plays a huge role in the fall of Macbeth because it is his kids that are foreseen to be Kings not Macbeths. “Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none: So all hail Macbeth, and Banquo. Your children and descendants will be kings” (page 314). In the play it is stated as this to confuse Macbeth, but he shall not have kids and Banquo will be the father of a line of kings. This is one of the many turns Shakespeare adds that changes it from the historical context. Many of the reasons that Macbeth has in the play did not exist in the real world. Historical Macbeth had an heir, but if he did not there was no real Banquo to swoop in with his kids. Almost all of what Shakespeare uses is just the names of factual people. The Tragedy of Macbeth is a story about the fall of a righteous man known as Macbeth, and Shakespeare added his own twist to cause all of the issues that make Macbeth who he is in the play. I believe that Shakespeare barely used any factual evidence in the making of his play.

Secondly, Macbeth was a good man in the real world, and Shakespeare just added hate to his name. Macbeth in the real world was a devoted christan, and he took a pilgrimage to Rome in 1050 (Ben Johnson).  He was the first Scottish monarch to take a leave and go on a trip to visit the pope. However, Shakespeare’s Macbeth was christan, but he wasn’t a good one. Shakespeare’s Macbeth broke many of the christans rules, and was never stated to be the man who would go out on an adventure to meet the pope. Historical Macbeth also ran a beautifully peace kingdom, “For the most part MacBeth ruled a relatively peaceful and prosperous kingdom.” (Ohio State) Shakespeare’s Macbeth however was cruel to his people, and had many of his own people killed. While the Historical Macbeth ruled with kindness and peace, Shakespear’s Macbeth ruled with fear and intimidation. Traits that Shakespear’s Macbeth picked up from Shakespear’s ignorance of the historical past.  These two Macbeths are on opposite sides of a spectrum. While one is all peace and christan, the other is terrified and yet so terrifying. This shows that Shakespeare did not use a lot of historical facts in the creation of Macbeth.

Thirdly, the Macbeths' differences in their kingship are proof of how little Shakespeare used actual historical accuracy. Macbeth was a well respected king in his time. He made many laws that were deemed as “good laws” from later scholars. Historical Macbeth was also highly respected among his people because of this, and because of this his people willingly joined him in battle to help defend Scotland from a massive invasion, but it left most of Macbeth's army slaughtered (History of Scotland). However, Shakespeare’s Macbeth is a perfect attethisis to Historical Macbeth when it comes to how they ruled. Shakespeare’s Macbeth was vile and cruel. He killed his own people to keep power, and nobody respected him. Shakespeare’s Macbeth was even shunned at his death. He was seen as a horrible man, and an even worse ruler. The only thing both Macbeths’ have in common is the fact that they failed to stop an invasion. I believe that Shakespeare’s Macbeth is hardly based on the actual Macbeth of legends. 

Finally, Shakespeare’s Macbeth had barely any influence on the creation of Historical Macbeth. The Macbeths do have their similarities, but the fact that they have thousands of more differences proves that Shakespeare probably just knew that Macbeth had a name and then died. The differences between them is immense, and just shows that Shakespear just wanted a story with a historical character, so he could add folk heroes to save the day. For Shakespeare’s play, he had to change Macbeth’s relationships with others, his great personality, and his almost perfect kingship. All the things Shakespeare kept were common knowledge; he kept Macbeth’s name, the fall of his kingdom to an invasion from Malcolm II, and all of this being in Scotland.