Macbeth: a smear campaign?
by Thursa Wilde
The
Scottish Play calls him Thane of Cawdor, but the real Macbeth was Mormaer of
Moray. (Thane and Mormaer were both
Scottish titles). It was from Holinshed’s Chronicles of England, Scotland and
Ireland, published in 1577, that Shakespeare lifted the incorrect title. These
chronicles are an ambitious account of history from earliest times, but aren’t
always based on historical fact. They took earlier references from books like
John Fordun’s Chronica Gentis Scotorum, (Chronicles of the Scottish People), written
1363-85, which contained accounts of angels, prophecies and Merlin among other
‘facts’. So either Holinshed’s invented the story of Macbeth and the witches,
or a folk-myth developed in the years after Macbeth’s death which Holinshed’s
picked up on, and Shakespeare later borrowed. Or maybe there is another reason.
The original decision was that succession
to the Scottish throne would alternate between the male issue of the two sons of
Kenneth MacAlpin, because of this unwise gambit the line of MacAlpin is
littered with poisoned and stabbed bodies. However Malcolm II had been on the
throne for 29 years when he decided on his heir, a long time for a Scottish
monarch! He was a shrewd leader, and although he only had daughters he married
them off to the heirs of families that might otherwise have caused him trouble.
So his grandsons, Duncan and Macbeth, were next in line. Malcolm chose Duncan, the elder of the two, as
his heir.
Macbeth had in the meantime married the
real Lady Macbeth, Gruach, the widow of his deceased cousin, Gillacomgain and granddaughter
of Kenneth III; and Macbeth’s own distant cousin, as she was also
Gillacomgain’s niece! This family tree
makes your head spin.
Gillacomgain is implicated in the killing
of Macbeth’s father when Macbeth was around 15 years old and he had stolen the
Mormaer title. About 12 years later Gillacomgain burned to death in a hall with
fifty of his men, and Macbeth became Mormaer of Moray. We don’t know whether
Macbeth, or his grandfather, Malcolm II, did the burning. But you could say Gillacomgain had it coming.
With marriage Macbeth was now related to
both branches of the MacAlpin line. This strengthened his position as heir to
the Scottish throne. Make of that what you will!
King Malcolm died at Glamis Castle in 1034,
allegedly of old age, though some annals say he was killed by his nephews. Duncan
then became Duncan I of Scotland. Although his 5 year reign seems mostly peaceful,
his nickname was An t-Ilgarach, meaning ‘the diseased’ or ‘the sick’. It is
recorded that Macbeth was Duncan’s Dux,
or Duke, a highly influential position near the king.
In 1039 the Northumbrians attacked
Strathclyde and Duncan retaliated against Durham, but this apparently went badly
and he retreated north to find himself in another battle in Moray against his
own Macbeth, who must have been plotting an overthrow in his absence, and seemed
to have much support. Duncan was not killed in his bed at Glamis Castle as the
play suggests, but on a battlefield by Macbeth and an army of Scotsmen. Duncan’s
wife and young sons fled into exile.
Macbeth ruled from 1040-1057. According to the Prophecy of Berchan Macbeth is described as ‘a generous king’. In a
historical narrative poem, Duan Albanach (Song of the Scots) he is
referred to as ‘Mac Bethad the renowned’. So there is no evidence to suggest
that he is unpopular, and a seventeen-year rule is good innings. Around 1050 he
undertook a pilgrimage to Rome. No one tried to overthrow him in his absence so
we can presume his reign was a peaceful one. That is until Malcolm, son of
Duncan showed up.
In 1052 Macbeth must have annoyed Edward the Confessor, King of
England, when he gave shelter to some Norman noblemen, because Edward began a
long war with Scotland which resulted in Malcolm meeting Macbeth in 1057 on a
battlefield in Lumphanan and fatally wounding him. (There’s a pub there now
called the Macbeth Arms!) Some historians think that England was behind a plan
to re-instate Malcolm on the throne, which might explain why negative
propaganda about Macbeth grew up. A popular monarch would need sullying to justify
the takeover.
Although old texts do differ about events, there is no
supporting evidence that Macbeth and his wife were serial killers. So where did
Holinshed’s get their information? Did the English King do a deal with Malcolm,
exiled at his court, and was Macbeth’s reputation destroyed as a result? You
know what those scheming English are like.
Thursa Wilde is a writer and member of the support team at
Highland Titles. Highland Titles sells plots of Scottish land to people all
over the world, many of whom have an affinity with Scotland and Great Britain.
