Macbeth in history as well as in Shakespeare’s play was king of Scotland, both historically accurate Macbeth and Shakespeare’s Macbeth gain the throne by killing Duncan but do so in very different ways. Drawing any more parallels between the two stories is limited mainly just to names and place from this point forward most likely because of William Shakespeare’s far from unbiased point of view. Historically accurate Macbeth in my not so humble opinion is the far better and much more interesting story. Historically accurate Macbeth was born the son of Findlaech, an earl of moray, and Doada, the second daughter of Malcolm II. When Macbeth was seven he was sent to a Christian monastery for an education. During this time at the monastery historically accurate Macbeth’s cousins, Malcolm and Gillecomgain, killed historically accurate Macbeth’s father, Findlaech. Shortly after historically accurate Macbeth's return from the monastery king Malcolm II ordered the death of historically accurate Macbeth’s cousin Gillecomgain for the killing of historically accurate Macbeth’s father. On November 24, 1034, Malcolm II died …show more content…
In the play Shakespeare’s non historically accurate Macbeth was portrayed as a radical murderous king who stole the throne and destroyed Scotland.
In the play Shakespeare’s non historically accurate Macbeth kills Duncan in his home after he was awarded thane for fighting with Duncan. Only then to go on a power hungry chase of power. These acts are not only not accurate but they are made out to justify the overthrowing of historically accurate Macbeth.
While it may stand true that the victor gets to write the history doesn’t always mean the vector was justified in taking action. Especially in the case of Macbeth where England held no real stake in Scotland other than anger toward a