Latest / The Story of Scotland: Clans, Crowns, and the Fight for Identity — Fexingo History / The Thane of Cawdor: Macbeth Before the Myth
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've covered a lot of Scottish ground — from Culloden to the Declaration of Arbroath, from the Lordship of the Isles to Mary Queen of Scots. But there's one figure who keeps popping up in pop culture and almost none of it is accurate. I'm talking about Macbeth. Luna: Ah, the 'Scottish play'. Shakespeare really did a number on him, didn't he? Lucas: He absolutely did. The real Macbeth was a king — and not a bad one, actually. He ruled for about seventeen years, from 1040 to 1057. That's a decent stretch in 11th-century Scotland, where kings were lucky to die in bed. Luna: Seventeen years? That's longer than most. So how did the real Macbeth become king? Lucas: Well, his claim came through his wife, Gruoch. She was a granddaughter of Kenneth III, who'd been king in the late 10th century. Macbeth himself was the Mormaer of Moray — that's essentially a regional ruler, one of the most powerful in the north. When the reigning king, Duncan I, came after him in 1040, Macbeth met him in battle near Elgin and Duncan was killed. Luna: So Duncan wasn't murdered in his sleep by a guest. He died in battle. Lucas: Exactly. The sources — the Prophecy of Berchán, which is a 12th-century Gaelic poem, and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle — both indicate it was a straightforward military defeat. Duncan was young, in his late twenties, and he'd made enemies. Macbeth had a stronger power base in Moray, and he took the throne. Lucas: Now, once king, Macbeth didn't go on a killing spree. He actually did something quite unusual for the time: in 1050, he left Scotland on a pilgrimage to Rome. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records that he 'scattered money like seed' to the poor there. That's not the behaviour of a tyrant. Luna: Wait — a medieval Scottish king going to Rome on pilgrimage and giving alms? That sounds like a pious ruler, not a monster. Lucas: Right. And he also managed to keep peace with the Norse earls of Orkney — no small feat. The Orkneyinga Saga mentions a conflict where Macbeth's forces clashed with Thorfinn the Mighty, but eventually they settled. For about a decade, Scotland under Macbeth was relatively stable. Luna: So where does the murderer image come from? Is it all Shakespeare? Lucas: Shakespeare's the main culprit, but he had sources. He used Holinshed's Chronicles, which drew on earlier Scottish historians like Hector Boece and John of Fordun. Those writers were working for the Stewart kings — they had an interest in painting Macbeth as a usurper, because the dynasty that followed him, the House of Dunkeld, was seen as the legitimate line. Lucas: The real end for Macbeth came in 1057, when Duncan's son, Malcolm Canmore — Malcolm III — returned from exile in England with an army. Macbeth was killed at the Battle of Lumphanan in Aberdeenshire. But even then, his stepson Lulach held out for a few months before Malcolm took the throne. Luna: So the historical Macbeth died fighting, not beheaded by Macduff in some final duel. Lulach — I don't think he's in the play at all. Lucas: He's not. And Lulach is fascinating — he was known as 'Lulach the Simple' or 'Lulach the Fool', but that might just be propaganda from the winning side. He was Macbeth's stepson from Gruoch's first marriage, and he actually ruled for a few months after Macbeth's death. Malcolm III eventually killed him too. Luna: It's amazing how different the real story is. I mean, the real Macbeth sounds like a capable ruler who just happened to lose a war. Lucas: That's the thing about medieval history — the winners write the narrative. And the House of Dunkeld, which traced its line back through Malcolm III, had every reason to make Macbeth look illegitimate. The fact that Macbeth's reign was relatively peaceful and that he went to Rome suggests a king who was confident in his position, at least for a time. Lucas: You know, speaking of things that are often misrepresented — if this conversation has been worth a coffee to you, we'd be grateful if you'd consider supporting the show. It's just buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. That kind of small gesture is what keeps us ad-free and able to dig into these stories properly. Luna: Yeah, it really does help. And honestly, it means we don't have to interrupt the history with ads. Lucas: Exactly. So back to Macbeth — one detail I love is that his name in Gaelic, Mac Bethad, means 'son of life'. Hardly the name of a cursed figure. And his wife Gruoch — her name might be the origin of Shakespeare's Lady Macbeth, though Shakespeare changed it to Gruach's anglicised form. Luna: Son of life — that's almost ironic given the legacy. What about the witches? Did the real Macbeth have any association with the supernatural? Lucas: None at all. That's entirely Shakespeare's invention, probably to cater to King James I's interest in witchcraft. James had written a book on demonology, and Shakespeare knew his audience. The historical Macbeth was a Christian king who went on pilgrimage. Lucas: There is a possible grain of truth in the idea that his reign was contested. In the Prophecy of Berchán, there's a stanza that says 'The king of the Saxons will be in his company' — maybe referring to Malcolm III's English allies. But no spells, no cauldrons, no 'double, double toil and trouble'. Luna: So if we strip away Shakespeare, what's the real legacy of Macbeth? A footnote in the Dunkeld dynasty's rise? Lucas: More than a footnote. Macbeth represents the last major challenge from the old mormaerdoms — the regional power structure that predated the more centralised Scottish monarchy. After him, the kingship became more stable, more influenced by Anglo-Norman ideas. His story is a window into a Scotland that was still very much Gaelic, where kings were elected from a pool of eligible royals, not simply inherited. Lucas: And if you ever visit Lumphanan, there's a stone circle called the Macbeth Stone that's said to mark where he fell. Whether it's accurate or not, it's a reminder that the real man lived and died in a landscape we can still see. Luna: I'd like to go there someday. It's strange to think that a figure so mythologised was just a king doing his best in a violent age. Lucas: Absolutely. And that's why it's worth telling his real story — not because it's more dramatic, but because it's human. Next time, maybe we'll look at another figure the history books got wrong.