Cathy McNeese
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Malevolent Magic in William Shakespeare’s Macbeth
“Double, double, toil and trouble; fire burn and cauldron bubble.” This incantation is an
iconic phrase that is one of the most recognizable quotes regarding witchcraft. Although these
indelible lines are not spoken until Act IV, the opening scene of Shakespeare’s Macbeth begins
amid a backdrop of thunder and lightning and sets the malevolent and sinister tone of the three
witches. Shakespeare employs the use of magic and the supernatural in many of his plays, but
in Macbeth his use of the supernatural casts a decidedly darker shadow than the mischievous
magic in the light-hearted Midsummer’s Night Dream or the mercurial conjuring involved in
The Tempest.
Why is the use of magic so malevolent and sinister in Macbeth? What possessed
Shakespeare to take the story of an 11th century Scottish Monarch and imbue it with witchcraft,
sorcery and spells? What historical information is available regarding magic and the
supernatural in the 11th century and during the Reign of King James I of England?
Delving into this murky quagmire where fact and fiction merge and mingle is a
daunting endeavor. Raphael Holinshed’s History of Scotland provides some illumination into
11th century Scotland and serves as one of the sources Shakespeare uses for Macbeth. George
Buchanan’s Rerum Scoticarum Historia and Discovery of Witchcraft by Reginald Scot,
published in 1584, also provide information regarding historical background and relationships
between magic and monarchy.
An in-depth study of these texts available to Shakespeare is essential for understanding
his malevolent depiction of the three witches and their influence on the fate of Shakespeare’s
Macbeth. Further, this link between malevolent magic and monarchy can be seen as a
reflection of the monarchies in both 11th century Scotland and the Reign of King James I.
One of the many theories as to why Shakespeare wrote Macbeth, his only play set in
Scotland, was the recent ascension of King James I to the English throne effectively “Uniting
the Crowns” of Scotland and England. Thus, there was a trend in London to embrace all things
Scottish in an effort to curry favor with the new monarch. Shakespeare, having lost his
illustrious patron upon the death of Queen Elizabeth I, needed to obtain a new sponsor for his
theatre and band of players. What better way to secure the newly crowned King James I as
Queen Elizabeth’s heir in this arena also, than to stage a play set in James’ homeland and, with
some suggestive pandering aimed at his religious and political point of view, hoping to
influence the King in exchange for royal patronage.
The recently crowned protestant King James I of England was extremely diligent in his
quest to eradicate those who practiced witchcraft and also those who were believed to be
cavorting with witches. Prior to ascending to the English throne in 1603, King James VI of
Scotland had a long and violent history regarding his zealous pursuit attempting to eradicate
the practice of witchcraft.
From the late 1500’s until the early 1700’s more people were accused of practicing
witchcraft, and consequentially were persecuted and executed, than in any other time in
history. In the United Kingdom, this period came to be known as “The Burning Time”.
During the years of 1560 to 1700 it is believed that between three and four thousand people
were accused of being witches or associating with witches and were tried and executed. The
majority of which occurred during King James’ reign (Guiley).
The most infamous incident revolved around the persecution of witches in Scottish
history occurred on October 31, 1590 in Berwick upon Tweed. It is commonly referred to as
“The North Berwick Witches Persecution”. During this celebration, those assembled were
2
accused of using witchcraft to conjure a mighty storm; powerful enough to assassinate King
James and his bride, Anne of Denmark by sinking the royal Man-of-War they were sailing on
from Denmark to Scotland. However, James soon learned of the assembly meeting of the
North Berwick coven and had the matter investigated and accused them of practicing
witchcraft (Sherrer). However, not everyone believed to be involved in this specific incident
was killed. The Earl of Bothwell, who was the highest ranking person accused, was believed
to be guilty and was incarcerated but escaped from captivity (Stefko).
It is the accusation of the Earl of Bothwell that helps to shed some light as to exactly
why King James VI was perhaps so very diligent in his pursuit of witches and practitioners of
magic. The Earl of Bothwell was considered to be a political enemy of the King. Thus, when
an opportunity arose after the North Berwick incident, James had the opportunity to link the
practice of witchcraft with conspiring to commit high treason. By doing this, he found a
vehicle in which he could “legally” dispose of threats against the crown.
Because of this purported link, one theory regarding the North Berwick Witch Trials is
that the entire incident was created by King James VI and his co-conspirators. It is further
believed that the sole aim of viewing the practice of witchcraft as treasonous was as a way to
remove any threat which impeded the progress of their political and religious views. Because
of his intrinsic belief in the divine right of kings, any suspicious practice not in line with his
protestant beliefs could then be considered a treasonous activity (Levack).
Levack further asserts that Queen Elizabeth I of England and King James VI of
Scotland saw the act of rebellion as blasphemy. Opposing either monarch was tantamount to
opposing God himself. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the act of rebellion was linked directly to
being in league with the devil, who led a revolt against the authority of God. Rebellion was
not only unlawful, but wicked. As a result, some argue that commonwealth subjects of
3
England and Scotland of the time had good reason to be afraid of rising up against their ruling
class (Levack).
King James was not alone in his abhorrence of witchcraft. During his reign, King
Henry VIII enacted the Witchcraft Act of 1542 because of the religious disparities England
was involved in. In this Act, he defined witchcraft “as a felony punishable by death and
forfeiture of goods and chattels”. When his daughter Queen Elizabeth I ascended to the throne,
she amended this act of her father’s and made even more stringent penalties. Her Witchcraft
Act of 1562 became the most notorious act because it stated that witchcraft was to be
considered a felony, and as such, the convicted felon would be put to death with no benefit of
clergy. King James VI, clearly cognizant of these English Acts, adopted them for Scotland and
produced the Witchcraft Act of 1563. He expanded upon the definition to include witchcraft as
a capital offence and that those consulting with witches, if they were found to be guilty, were
also to be put to death. In addition to the legislation enacted and fervently enforced, King
James I, is credited with the authorship of a book entitled, Daemonologie, in which he
emphatically states: “Witches are servant only, and slaves to the Devil; but the Necromancers
are his masters and commanders...Witches could be transported by natural means, or they
could be carried through the air, by the force of the spirit which is their conductor
(Notestein).”
After ascertaining the best avenue of influence to follow regarding King James I’s
religious and political viewpoints, Shakespeare most likely began his research into the
historical background of Scotland and the biographical information of potential Scottish
historical figures available at the time, which could be used as inspiration for his play. He was
quite familiar with the work of Raphael Holinshed. His Chronicles encompass the collective
histories of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. His first edition was published in 1577,
and during Shakespeare’s lifetime, a second edition, updated and corrected was made available
4
in 1587. Upon comparing the two editions by Holinshed with several large unaltered portions
of Holinshed’s publication inserted into Shakespeare’s plays, it is commonly held that
Shakespeare used the 1587 second edition as his main source and guide for the majority of his
English history plays. For his inspiration, Shakespeare delved into ancient Scotland through
Holinshed’s Vol. II: The Historie of Scotland. Here he found a largely unknown snippet of
history regarding an 11th century King which was perfect for his aforementioned agenda
regarding King James. From Holinshed, he gleaned information regarding the use of
supernatural knowledge in conjunction with treason and regicide.
When comparing Holinshed’s historical account to Macbeth, it is clear that the entire
plot of Shakespeare’s play was borrowed from Holinshed with some judicious embellishments
and additional departures from his source. Although Shakespeare is often credited with
subverting the historical truth in his quest for entertaining theatrical performances, it is patently
apparent that in this specific instance, he is staying fairly close to Holinshed’s version of
Macbeth’s history. That being said, it is hard to imagine that Shakespeare could possibly
believe that this version of history was remotely accurate, but it is even more doubtful that he
cared about the veracity of Holinshed’s claim. Because the story corresponded so cohesively
with King James’ religious and political convictions and noting how closely Shakespeare’s
play resembles Holinshed’s history, Shakespeare likely doesn’t see the need to corroborate his
information with a second source.
However, another historical publication regarding Scotland was available. This book,
entitled: Rerum Scoticarum Historia (The History of Scottish Kings) by George Buchanan also
gives an accounting of Macbeth and his ascension to the Scottish throne. In his version, he
differed from Holinshed regarding the prophetic offerings of the “witches” in book seven of his
history. Although Buchanan’s version mentions a prophesy given to Macbeth, it is framed
within a dreamscape, and there is no suggestion of magic or supernatural forces of any kind.
5
The description of the women who appear in Macbeth’s dream is also radically different from
that of Holinshed, and would not fit comfortably into the narrative that Shakespeare was
devising for his version of Macbeth’s story.
Although much time and research has been dedicated through the years addressing the
disputes regarding the various depictions of Macbeth, one elemental fact stands out above the
rest. If Shakespeare had not written his “Scottish Play”, Macbeth would just be a footnote in a
book no one knows or cares about. It is entirely due to his genius and creativity that an obscure
King from the eleventh century is such an iconic figure. Almost everyone is aware of whom
Macbeth is, and it is quite an accomplishment Shakespeare has achieved that his version of
events has completely superseded historical accuracy. Macbeth has become an infamous and
tragic figure synonymous with the character traits of greed, ambition, and treachery. As equally
famous as Macbeth are the weird sisters Shakespeare so skillfully and cunningly portrays as
practitioners of witchcraft immersed in the dark and shadowy nether regions of magic and the
supernatural.
Shakespeare uses various elements of magic and the supernatural in many of his
plays: from the carefree Puck in Midsummer’s Night Dream, to the ghost of Hamlet’s
father, and the fierce Prospero in The Tempest. Macbeth, however offers the grimmest
and most menacing portrayal of the supernatural with his depiction of the weird sisters.
Indeed, in the opening scene of the play, with only the stage direction of Thunder and
lightening. Enter three witches, Shakespeare sets the tone of the entire play.
The first act is a mere thirteen lines, and isn’t that also a clever little twist
probably not apparent to a theater audience – to someone reading the play it would
certainly be noted , but imbedded in the opening line is the indication that witches meet
in thunder, lightening or rain – none of which are cheerful options. Further, the third
witch states they will not meet until after the sun sets, another suggestion of darkness and
6
wicked intent. In a less obvious line, the first witch references her cat, a well-known
superstitious belief regarding witches and their ‘familiars’, which has the name
Graymalkin, drawing the audiences’ attention to the murky and nebulous realm of
shadows. Then, in the closing lines of Act I, Scene i, the three sisters in unison offer an
incantation of “Fair is foul, and foul is fair, Hover through the fog and filthy air (1.1.1213).” Once again, the audience is given an image of impenetrable fog and an unhealthy
atmosphere. Thus, the stage has been set and the audience prepped for the tragedy about
to unfold as the play progresses.
Although the weird sisters appear in only four scenes during the entire play and
their lines are minimal, they are pivotal to the plot and, along with the titular character of
Macbeth and his wife, they are the most recognizable and quoted characters of the play.
In their second appearance on stage, they meet with Macbeth and Banquo, amid thunder
and lightening of course. It is during this scene that they offer to the men prophecies
pertaining to their futures, and as in the way of prophecies, the ones offered by the weird
sisters prove to be detrimental to both men. The tragic consequences the prophecies have
on Macbeth, and through his ambition and greed, upon Banquo as well, are seemingly
linked to the witches.
The third scene in which the weird sisters make their appearance is in Act Three,
Scene 5 which is a rather disconnected scene that doesn’t fit smoothly into the context of
the rest of the play. In this vignette, the three sisters are meeting with Hecate, the witch
with the highest authority, and she has all but three lines in this extremely brief scene and
largely unnecessary scene. Hecate’s speech is a cautionary warning to the audience about
using unethical and immoral means, as exemplified by Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, to
obtain the desired result. In other words, the ends DO NOT justify the means. Although,
the closing lines by Malcolm seem to make the same point much more eloquently.
7
However, this scene with Hecate serves to transition the weird sisters into their final
scene of the play.
Act IV, Scene I, entering with a thunderous presence of course, opens with the
weird sisters chanting an incantation and preparing a potion in order to precipitate
Macbeth’s downfall. As mentioned in the opening of this discourse, this scene offers the
oft misquoted, but most recognizable phrase associated with Shakespeare’s witches, the
infamous “Double, double, toil and trouble; fire burn and cauldron bubble, et al.” Along
with this incantation, the image of witches chanting around a boiling cauldron preparing a
potion and conjuring dark spirits and black magic, provide an indelible impression of
witchcraft that is still identifiable today. This scene is extremely grim, and shares many
similarities with the famous Oracles of Delphi; the vision given is deceptive and provides
various conflicting ways of interpreting the information.
One of the images offered in this scene, can be interpreted as be directly related to
the discussion offered previously regarding Shakespeare’s motivation in writing this play.
In the final vision conjured by the weird sister, an apparition of eight Kings in the image
of Banquo appear. The eighth and final sovereign in the vision is holding two balls and
carrying three scepters (4.1.135-140). This is often seen as a nod toward King James I, as
he is purportedly the eighth generational descendant of Banquo, who upon being crowned
in 1603, united England and Scotland under one ruler, as indicated by the two balls in the
vision, and he also had sovereignty over Ireland, hence the trio of scepters. Which again
brings to mind Shakespeare’s motivation is crafting this play.
It appears that with Macbeth, Shakespeare is shamelessly pandering to King
James by catering to his hatred magic and the supernatural and his depiction of the weird
sisters fulfill every stereotype imaginable to render witches as revolting in character and
unappealing in appearance as possible. Through the prophecies the offer to Macbeth, the
8
correlation between witchcraft and treason seems patently clear. However, such is the
skill of Shakespeare, that the link between sorcery and treason can be both supported and
refuted by using the same lines of dialogue.
Although the weird sisters have limited time physically on the stage, their
presence dominates the action and permeates every moment of the performance whether
they are a visible presence on stage or not. Therefore, it is somewhat surprising to
consider the possibility that Shakespeare does not actually believe in witches and
witchcraft at all. It also is worth some reflection that perhaps he put more weight into
Buchanan’s interpretation of events than is apparent at first glance. However, consider
this relevant fact. The weird sisters and Hecate, do not come into contact with anyone in
the play other than Macbeth and Banquo. If this is the case, it can be persuasively argued
that all of the episodes involving the witches DO appear as a within a dreamscape or as a
manifestation conjured by Macbeth’s desire to become King. Thus, his greed and
ambition are solely responsible for his treason activities and multiple murders in pursuit
of his unholy goal.
Another point on which to ponder is what evidence there is that the weird sisters
ever engage in any activities considered treasonous. By Celtic law, Macbeth was next in
line for the throne, so the fact that they addressed him as King of Scotland as part of their
prophecy was actually not as preposterous as it appears within the context of the play.
King Duncan, by indicating that his intention to name his son as his successor is, in
reality, the one who is overreaching his authority and showing poor judgment by
choosing the next ruler from his desire to emulate the English tradition of succession
which values familial connection over competence to rule. As a point of interest,
Macbeth was the last ruler in Scotland from the Celtic tradition of rule (McHardy).
9
In addition to the prophecies, the incantations are another point of contention.
Given the fact that the witches offer quite a few chants and spells during the scant amount
of time they are on stage, it would be easy to simply take this at face value and declare
that of course Shakespeare is agreeing with King James regarding his stance on witches.
However, what is perhaps not as well known is the fact that Shakespeare was meticulous
in his research regarding witchcraft and the art of conjuring. Previously, the fact that
King James had written a treatise on Daemonologie was discussed. This book was
written prior to his reign in England, but people in England were aware of it. In
particular, a man by the name of Reginald Scot certainly knew of this book, and he
disagreed with the monarchy’s stance regarding witchcraft. He emphatically stated that
the witch hunts being undertaken across the land were perpetuated by the religious
leaders and that witchcraft was not legitimate, but rather the practice of conjuring and the
practice of magic was the work of charlatans. He wrote a book on the subject refuting the
claims of the church entitled, The Discovery of Witchcraft, which was published in 1584.
This was the first definitive book of witchcraft, and included several examples of how to
debunk the myths surrounding the practice of conjuring and also included many actual
incantations believed to be used by witches. Shakespeare was not the only person aware
of this book. King James also had knowledge of this book, and after being crowned King
of England, he promptly banned the book and ordered all available copies to be burned.
Because of this edict, no complete copy of Scot’s book remain in existence (Scot).
In light of this information, it can be extremely perplexing trying to ascertain
Shakespeare’s actual stance regarding witchcraft. He seems to be skirting a very fine line
between pandering to King James’ politics and providing a satirical parody of those
beliefs. Of course, this ambivalence almost seems to be stock in trade for Shakespeare.
The various ways the play can be discussed and interpreted simply means that it on a
10
commercial level the play is successful. What is not in doubt however is the very
tangible correlation King James believes existed between witchcraft and treasonous
activity, and also that of King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I, and their influence over
the legislation enacted by King James VI. Whether this was a true religious belief
embraced by King James, or an expedient politically motivated tool is impossible to
definitively ascertain. More than likely, the answer is to be found hovering somewhere
between these two extremes. Likewise, because the histories of both Holinshed and
Buchanan were written during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I of England and King James
VI of Scotland, the prevailing political and religious beliefs of the 16th century permeate
the depiction rendered regarding the reign of Macbeth in 11th century Scotland. Thus,
neither version offers an unbiased portrayal of Macbeth or an accurate accounting of how
he came to power in Scotland.
What is unequivocally true is that Shakespeare’s version of Macbeth’s story is the
vehicle that drives the discussion and interest. Shakespeare’s rhetorical skill is
unsurpassed in terms of longevity and Macbeth offers tangible proof with its many
instantly recognizable quotes; most especially the dialogue from the weird sisters.
11
Sources Cited
Brosseau, Gardner, “Witchcraft Acts” Web. November 19, 2009
Buchanan, George, Rerum Scoticarum Historia, The Seventh Book,
Web. November 19, 2009
Guiley, Rosemary Ellen, The Encyclopedia of Witches & Witchcraft,
Facts on File, Inc., 1999. Web. November 19, 2009
Holinshed, Raphael, Shakspere’s Holinshed 1896, London: Lawrence and
Bullen, Ltd., pp xii-xiv, 18-45
Levack, Brian P. (1995). The witch hunt in early modern Europe (Second ed.).
London and New York: Longman. pp. 38, 64-67
Magnusson, Magnus, Scotland: The Story of a Nation, New York: Grove Press
2000, pp 50-60.
McHardy, Stuart, “Strange Secrets of Ancient Scotland” Web. November 19, 2009
Notestein, Wallace, A History of Witchcraft in England From 1558 to 1712,
Web. November 19, 2009
Satin, Joseph, Shakespeare and His Sources, Boston: Houghton Mifflin 1966, pp. 533-572
Scot, Reginald, The Discovery of Witchcraft,(London, 1584)ed. By Frank Luttmer
History, Hanover Education Courses. Web. November 19, 2009
Shakespeare, William, Macbeth, Folger Shakespeare Library Edition
Ed. Mowat & Werstine, New York: Washington Square Press, 1992
Sherrer, Hans, “81 Scottish “Witches” Pardoned”, For Justice: Denied magazine
December, 2004.Web. November 19, 2009
Stefko, Jill, “North Berwick Witches’ Persecution” Web. November 19, 2009
12