In William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, the title character’s journey from a valiant soldier to a murderer is deeply intertwined with his relationship with his wife, Lady Macbeth.
One of the central questions in analyzing this tragedy is whether Macbeth would have killed King Duncan without the powerful influence of Lady Macbeth. As the play unfolds, it becomes clear that Macbeth’s actions are initially shaped by hesitation, moral conflict, and his wife’s manipulative persuasion. But, after Duncan’s murder, Macbeth continues to commit further heinous acts without any such encouragement. This raises the intriguing question: would Macbeth have killed Duncan on his own, or was he entirely reliant on Lady Macbeth’s power over him?
At the start of the play, Macbeth is depicted as a loyal soldier, not inherently evil, but susceptible to ambition. When he first hears the witches’ prophecy about his future as king, his immediate reaction is to be surprised, and he briefly entertains the idea of becoming king, but only as a distant possibility. It is Lady Macbeth who quickly becomes the driving force behind his decision to act on this ambition. Upon learning of the prophecy, she immediately begins to plot the murder of King Duncan. In her famous soliloquy, she even prays to be “unsexed” and filled with cruelty, demonstrating her resolve to push her husband into committing the regicide.
Without Lady Macbeth, Macbeth seems to lack the resolve to carry out the deed. He hesitates, questioning the morality of killing Duncan, his kinsman and a benevolent ruler. It is Lady Macbeth’s relentless persuasion that ultimately convinces him to overcome his scruples and seize the opportunity. She questions his manhood, ridicules his fear, and promises to guide him through the act. Her influence over him is undeniable, and without her, it’s unclear whether he would have followed through with the murder.
However, once Duncan is dead, Macbeth’s hesitation begins to fade. He murders without the need for further encouragement from Lady Macbeth. He kills Banquo and arranges the death of others, each act more deliberate and ruthless than the last. This shift in Macbeth suggests that, at least in part, he was always inclined towards malice. While Lady Macbeth might have spurred him to action, the capacity for evil was present within him, waiting for the right opportunity to manifest.
In some ways, Lady Macbeth acts as a catalyst for Macbeth’s latent ambitions. Her initial encouragement emboldens him to act, but after Duncan’s death, he seems to discover his own capacity for violence and power. The Macbeth we see after Duncan’s murder is far less dependent on Lady Macbeth’s influence, and his later acts of violence suggest that, even without her, he might have found another way to fulfill his ambitions, though perhaps with more hesitation and internal conflict.
An intriguing comparison can be made between Macbeth and another of Shakespeare’s famous tragic heroes, Hamlet. Like Macbeth, Hamlet is driven by the desire to avenge his father’s death and kill a king—Claudius. However, unlike Macbeth, Hamlet hesitates at every turn, consumed by indecision and moral conflict. It is easy to imagine that, had Hamlet had a person like Lady Macbeth by his side, someone who could manipulate and push him towards action, his fate might have been very different. Hamlet’s tragic flaw is his inability to act decisively, and Lady Macbeth’s influence on Macbeth shows just how powerful a motivating force such a person can be.
If Hamlet had a Lady Macbeth to encourage him, perhaps his internal struggles would have been resolved much sooner, leading him to take decisive action. Lady Macbeth, with her ruthless ambition, might have convinced Hamlet to act with the same boldness that Macbeth ultimately adopts. But, of course, this assumes that Hamlet’s moral nature could have been influenced in the same way Macbeth’s was. Hamlet is often portrayed as more philosophically and introspectively driven, and it is unclear whether he would have been as susceptible to manipulation as Macbeth.
Ultimately, the question arises: Was Macbeth inherently evil, or was it Lady Macbeth’s influence that pushed him to commit murder? While Lady Macbeth plays a crucial role in the initial murder of Duncan, Macbeth’s later actions suggest that he had a predisposition for violence and ambition. The witches’ prophecy may have triggered his darker impulses, but Lady Macbeth merely ignited the spark. In the end, Macbeth’s own desires and ambition, combined with his ability to act ruthlessly when the need arises, suggest that even without Lady Macbeth, he would likely have found his way to the throne—though perhaps with more internal conflict.
To sum up, Lady Macbeth’s power over her husband is significant, but Macbeth’s transformation into a tyrant suggests that his capacity for evil was always there. His path to regicide was undoubtedly influenced by her, but it was also shaped by his own dark ambitions. Had Hamlet been given a Lady Macbeth, he might have been able to act more decisively, but it’s also possible that his own moral and philosophical nature would have made him less susceptible to such manipulation. Both tragedies explore the complex relationship between personal ambition, external influence, and moral choice, with different outcomes depending on the characters’ inherent natures and the forces around them.
This article was written with Nina