Latest / The Story of Scotland: Clans, Crowns, and the Fight for Identity — Fexingo History / The Macbeth Controversy: Scotland's Real King and the Shakespeare Myth
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've covered a lot of Scottish history — battles, clearances, the Declaration of Arbroath. But there's one figure almost everyone's heard of, and almost everything they think they know is wrong. Luna: You're talking about Macbeth, aren't you? Lucas: Exactly. The Shakespeare play is so powerful that it completely overwrote the actual man. The real Macbeth was a legitimate king who ruled for seventeen years — a stable reign, peaceful enough that he could afford to go on pilgrimage to Rome. Luna: Wait, Macbeth went to Rome? Lucas: He did. In 1050, Macbeth and his wife Gruoch — that's the real Lady Macbeth — travelled to Rome for a papal jubilee. Contemporary chronicles record him 'scattering money like seed to the poor'. That's not exactly the tyrant we see in the play. Lucas: To understand who Macbeth really was, we need to look at 11th-century Scotland. The kingdom was divided into provinces ruled by mormaers — basically powerful regional lords. Macbeth was the Mormaer of Moray, which was a semi-independent kingdom in the north. Luna: So he wasn't just a random thane? Lucas: No, not at all. The title 'Thane of Cawdor' is Shakespeare's invention. In reality, Macbeth had a strong claim to the throne through his mother's side — he was descended from Malcolm II, just like Duncan was. In fact, some historians argue Macbeth's claim was actually stronger. Lucas: Duncan I became king in 1034, but he was young and inexperienced. In 1040, he launched a disastrous campaign into Moray, and Macbeth defeated and killed him at the Battle of Pitgaveny. Macbeth then became king — not through assassination in his sleep, but in open battle. Luna: So Duncan was the aggressor? Lucas: Exactly. And Macbeth's reign was, by most accounts, a good one. The Chronicle of the Kings of Alba describes him as a generous ruler who gave alms and maintained law and order. He even incorporated Norse and Gaelic legal traditions. Lucas: The trouble came from Duncan's family. His son Malcolm — later Malcolm III — was sent to England for safety. In 1054, with the support of the English king Edward the Confessor, Malcolm invaded Scotland. The two armies met at the Battle of Dunsinane — yes, the same Dunsinane from the play. Luna: But Shakespeare has Macbeth killed there by Macduff. Lucas: Right, but the real Macbeth survived Dunsinane and retreated north. He was finally killed three years later at the Battle of Lumphanan in Aberdeenshire, in 1057. His stepson Lulach briefly succeeded him before Malcolm took the throne. Lucas: So where did Shakespeare get his version? His main source was Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, which itself drew on earlier Scottish historians like Hector Boece. Boece had a motive — he wrote under the patronage of James IV and later James V, who were descended from Malcolm III. Painting Macbeth as a usurper legitimised their own line. Luna: So it was political spin, even back then. Lucas: Exactly. And Shakespeare had his own reasons. He wrote Macbeth in 1606, just after the Gunpowder Plot. James I had recently come to the English throne from Scotland, and he was obsessed with witchcraft and regicide. The play flattered James by showing Banquo — his supposed ancestor — as noble, and by demonising Macbeth, who had killed a king. Lucas: The real Macbeth was buried on Iona, the traditional resting place of Scottish kings. That alone tells you he was seen as a legitimate ruler, not a tyrant. His reputation only soured centuries later, thanks to a playwright looking for a good story. Luna: It's amazing how one work of fiction can reshape history so completely. Lucas: It really is. And speaking of reshaping — you know, we try to keep this show free from ads and sponsors. It's a choice we've made from the start. If you value that, and you want to support the kind of deep-dive conversations we have here, you can find us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. No pressure, it just helps keep the show exactly as it is. Luna: Yeah, it's a way to keep doing these deep dives without any commercial breaks. Lucas: Anyway, back to Macbeth. Another fascinating detail is that Gruoch, the real Lady Macbeth, was actually a widow with a son before she married Macbeth. Her first husband was Gille Coemgáin, the previous Mormaer of Moray, who was burned to death with fifty of his men in 1032. Gruoch's brother was also killed by Malcolm II. So she had plenty of reason to support Macbeth's claim. Luna: She wasn't a manipulative villain — she was a survivor. Lucas: Precisely. The play makes her a monster, but the historical Gruoch was a powerful woman in her own right, a queen who likely helped hold the kingdom together during Macbeth's absences. And speaking of absences, that pilgrimage to Rome — it's remarkable. Very few Scottish kings made that journey. It shows Macbeth was confident in his rule and wanted to demonstrate his piety. Lucas: There's also the Prophecy of Berchán, a 12th-century poem that describes Macbeth's reign in surprisingly positive terms. It calls him 'the generous king of the Fortriu' and says he ruled with 'wisdom and bounty'. That's a far cry from the 'butcher' Shakespeare wrote. Luna: So when did the myth really take over? Lucas: Shakespeare's play was hugely popular, and as English literature became central to education, the fictional Macbeth became the only Macbeth anyone knew. By the 19th century, even historians struggled to separate fact from fiction. It's only in the last few decades that scholars have really worked to rehabilitate the historical Macbeth. Lucas: If you ever visit Cawdor Castle in the Highlands, the guides will tell you it's not the real Macbeth's castle — it was built centuries later. But the legend is so strong that tourists still ask about his ghost. The myth has become its own kind of history. Luna: That's a good reminder that history is always being rewritten. Lucas: Absolutely. And maybe that's the best lesson of all: to question the stories we think we know, and look for the people behind the legends.