Biblical Influences on William Shakespeare's Macbeth

"Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood / Clean from my hand?" asks Macbeth, in the play in which he is the title character, as he frantically scrubs in an attempt to remove the evidence of his regicide. "No, this my hand will rather / The multitudinous seas incarnadine, / Making the green one red." (II.ii.63-66)

To his own mind, Macbeth is forever scarred with the act he has committed against his king. This does not differ greatly from the doctrine of original sin. The concept of original sin is that the sin of Adam and Eve is transferred to all of their descendants, and thus all of humanity is tainted.

Macbeth is so distraught, in fact, that when he hears a prayer being said, "I could not say 'Amen' / when they did say 'God bless us.'" (II.ii.31-32) In some traditions, it is believed that all of human history is the struggle to return to the relationship man had with God in the Garden of Eden. Macbeth has clearly lost his intimacy with the divine.

The story of the expulsion from Eden is found in Genesis, Chapter 3. After God has specifically told Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, the serpent nonetheless tempts Eve to eat the fruit, which she does. As well, she gives some to Adam, which he eats. God punishes them by having men struggle for their food, and women suffer the pain of childbirth and be subservient to their husbands.

The parallel story in William Shakespeare's Macbeth begins with Macbeth being promised the throne of Scotland. He contemplates killing the current king, Duncan, but decides against it. His wife, Lady Macbeth, coerces him into the murder, which he commits. The prophecy is fulfilled as Macbeth is crowned, but soon becomes a dictator and brings misery into Scotland.

It was traditionally believed that Genesis, which contains the story of The Fall, was written by Moses, being the first of the Five Books of Moses, or the Pentateuch. Three sources have been identified by modern scholarship: the J (Yahwist), from the tenth or ninth century BCE; the E (Elohist), from the eighth century BCE; and the P (Priestly), from the sixth century BCE.

While we do not know the exact date of the publication of Macbeth, it is believed to be around 1603, which is when King James I of England began his reign. In fact, much of the play seems to pay tribute to him. However, as is common with literature from the era, the text we have today is not the exact same as the original. Many revisions were made after Shakespeare's death. There are many theories about what parts of it were additions of later playwrights, though nobody knows what was in the play originally that has since been removed. Many scholars believe that much has been removed over time due to the brevity of the play in comparison with Shakespeare's other works. The version we read now was originally published in 1623. Shakespeare had been dead for years by that point.

It is interesting to note the many ways one can find parallel between the story of the expulsion and Macbeth. The serpent tells Eve that eating from the tree will make her "like God," (Gen. 3:5), and Macbeth's sin is for the sake of becoming king. (Lady Macbeth, in fact, is enticed by her husband's letter, telling her that she will be queen. That is what inspires her to murder Duncan.) Adam's sin is often believed to be the cause of all suffering and evil in the world, and Macbeth's regicide is the beginning of Scotland's misery. The most recognizable similarity is probably the fact that it is the woman who has tempted the man to sin.

For centuries, men have oppressed women, and have often quoted the story of the fall as their justification. For one, Adam came before Eve. Eve is also responsible for original sin (as she gave the fruit to Adam), and God also included female submission as part of his punishment. And, lest we forget, God is referred to with masculine pronouns throughout the whole Bible.

Some schools of psychology feel that men are subconsciously jealous of women's ability to give birth. The authors of the Bible probably suffered from that. It seems to me that they compensated for their inabilities by making God, the creator of all things and apparently a mother, male. They also made Eve a growth of a part of Adam's body, the same way a child grows from a woman's body. Tragically, men have used these stories to continue to put women down and improve themselves.

Being male, Shakespeare may also have participated in the envy of female reproductive powers. Act IV, Scene ii, sets the wife of Macduff, another major character, and her children, at home in Scotland. Macduff has deserted his family on a quest to see Malcolm, Duncan's eldest son, in spite of the fact that his wife and children may be in danger because of Macbeth's tyranny. Unsurprisingly, the house is stormed and all of the inhabitants are killed. Shakespeare may be showing here that in spite of the fact that a woman can give life, she cannot save it. Only a man may do that. While man cannot become pregnant or give birth, he controls the lives of those already born.

In addition, Macduff himself is "of no woman born." This is explained when he tells Macbeth he was born by C-section. Stephen Orgel points out that a vaginal birth, in Shakespeare's era, would have been handled by women, such as midwives, while a surgical birth would be handled by men and almost definitely kill the mother. Here is an example of men creating life.

Whether or not Shakespeare was jealous of women, he clearly supported the idea that they are the source of evil. In addition to Macbeth being coerced by his wife, Malcolm makes it clear that he is a virgin when he makes the case that he will be a good king. Macduff, as well, fulfills a prophecy that Macbeth's killer will be "of no woman born." The good characters are uncorrupted by women, while the source of all evil is only such because of his wife.

Macduff's unique birth has been the topic of much debate. One theory states that it is a recreation of the virgin birth, as described in Matthew 1:18-25. Macduff may be a Christ figure in this manner. And indeed, he kills Macbeth, the man who is responsible for Scotland's torment. It is interesting to see that the event that destroyed man's relationship with God (the sin of Adam) and the event that restored it (the coming of Christ) are paralleled in the same play.

Another interesting note is the nature of Scotland before Macbeth takes over, i.e. under Duncan's rule. We are bombarded with praise of Duncan, but that comes only from his closest supporters and kinsmen. Macbeth himself falters on his opinions of the king, saying in I.vii that Duncan's goodness "will plead like angels, trumpet-tongued against / The deep damnation of his taking off." Yet he changes his mind at the close of his famous dagger soliloquy in II.I, by saying of the bell that rings off stage, "Hear it not, Duncan, for it is a knell / That summons thee to heaven or to hell." In addition, let us not forget the fact that the war at the beginning of the play is a revolt, not a foreign invasion.

If Scotland before Macbeth is indeed the Garden of Eden, and Duncan is indeed God, we are inclined to ask what Shakespeare thinks of the garden story. Clearly, he does not see Eden as the paradise the Bible frames it as, and God, in the form of Duncan, while never denied to be a virtuous ruler by his highest ranking nobles, nonetheless has enemies in his ranks. In addition, Dr. Susan Willis points out that Duncan names his own son as heir to the throne, which violates Scottish succession laws of the era. Rightfully, Macbeth should have been heir even without Malcolm fleeing the country, as the throne was alternated between the heads of the houses of Atholl and Moray, which Duncan and Macbeth were respectively. To those who know this history, Duncan appears selfish and even criminal.

In that case, what is Shakespeare saying about the Garden of Eden? Perhaps he is implying that no such perfect place could ever exist, or more likely, that any attempt to create paradise is utter foolishness. Duncan, who receives the highest praises from his kinsmen, is flawed, and thus less than God. If indeed he ran his kingdom as well as the Thanes around him say, it was not enough to prevent violence. Macduff, the Christ figure, does not rid Scotland of sin in a manner of self-sacrifice, but rather violence. And most significantly, the final prophecy that Banquo's son will be king is unfulfilled. It appears, at the end, that Scotland has returned to a state of peace, and Malcolm, formerly the heir to the throne, now sits on it. But the violence likely does not end there, as Fleance, according to the three witches, will one day rule. How else can he gain the crown but through violence? Nobody, not even the Christ figure, can prevent that from happening.

Shakespeare's historical source, Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, records that Fleance's descendants did in fact gain the throne, but their method was anything but peaceful. Macbeth tells us that violence is inevitable, even under the best circumstances. The title character himself states it best: "It will have blood, they say: blood will have blood." (III.iv.123)

The story in Genesis seems to explain the roots of evil. The biblical authors may have wanted to explain how a just and loving God can allow suffering to exist. Indeed, it is man who is responsible, not God. In Macbeth, the same is true. Human beings are responsible for their own suffering, simply due to ambition and human imperfection. Genesis seems to imply the possibility of human perfection, however. It is the snake that tempts Eve in the Garden, and thus it is entirely possible for sin to have never occurred. In Macbeth, nothing can prevent bloodshed.

The analysis of the metaphor in Macbeth and the story it is based on that I have offered is an attempt to examine the major themes of the two works. My method was to look at Macbeth in relation to the Genesis story, and see the places they either agree or disagree, and thus show in what way the play is a biblical metaphor, and more importantly, its commentary on the Bible. I believe that Shakespeare did not want to comment on the Bible itself, but to use that particular story as background for his opinions about humanity. Three motifs in the story of the fall are a) paradise, b) sin, and c) gender roles. These are also motifs in Macbeth, so it is natural to use the Garden as an example.

My analysis has been very modernist. I have carefully attempted to find the intentions that Shakespeare had through historical-critical method. I have not examined the history of the text itself so much, but that is partially due to the fact that very little is known about the history of the text. I have, however, looked at much of the history that Macbeth is based on. I have included Holinshed's Chronicles, an examination of surgical procedures in the Elizabethan era, and the laws of the right to the throne in Scotland. Shakespeare was probably knowledgeable about all of these subjects, so they may have been in his mind when he wrote the play. I have attempted to use such things to predict what precisely was in his head. This is a very modernist approach.

As well as history, I have not ignored psychology. By looking at the psychological phenomenon of masculine jealousy, I have tried to discover some of the subconscious intents of the authors of the Bible and of Macbeth. This is still modernist, though not so much historical-critical.

It is almost without a doubt that William Shakespeare, when writing Macbeth, had the Bible in mind, at least partially. So much of the story parallels Biblical incidents. In all probability, Shakespeare was not commenting so much on the Bible, but rather using the story of Eden as a basis for what he intended to say about humanity. He puts forth his opinions about gender, evil, and so many other themes, and never fails to use the Bible as a place to start. This hardly comes as a surprise when one considers that the Bible was arguably the most influential work of literature at the time and had things to say about each of those themes as well. The authors in some cases had similar opinions and in some cases different ones, but they use a similar story to display them.