What do you think?
Rate this book
Macbeth: A True Story
Thanks to William Shakespeare, the name Macbeth has become byword for political ambition realised by bloody violence. The character of Macbeth in the celebrated Shakespearean tragedy is based on an actual Scottish king who lived and died five hundred years before he was immortalised. However, the Macbeth thus conjured up bears almost no resemblance whatsoever to the king who ruled Scotland between 1040 and 1057. In fact, it is difficult to exaggerate how great an injustice history and Shakespeare have inflicted on Mac Bethad mac Findlaich.
Fiona Watson has uncovered, buried beneath the layers of myth, a history that is entirely different from, but just as extraordinary as, that recounted by Shakespeare. The historical Macbeth was a remarkable man living in turbulent times. As ruler of Alba (Scotland) he sat on one of the oldest and most established thrones in Western Europe. It is true that he killed Duncan, the previous king, but this was the normal, if brutal, method of regime change in Dark Age Scotland. Duncan's rash behaviour, culminating in a humiliating military defeat in northern England, was reason enough to prompt his removal before Scotland's security was further compromised. The reality is that Macbeth quickly established himself as an effective and popular ruler.
As a Celtic warrior-king, he was responsible for the maintenance of his people's dominance of northern Britain. A friend to the Church and valiant protector of his people, the real Macbeth epitomised the contemporary model of vigorous medieval kingship. His fascinating story, long overdue in the telling, is done full justice in Fiona Watson's authoritative and compelling narrative.
Fiona Watson has uncovered, buried beneath the layers of myth, a history that is entirely different from, but just as extraordinary as, that recounted by Shakespeare. The historical Macbeth was a remarkable man living in turbulent times. As ruler of Alba (Scotland) he sat on one of the oldest and most established thrones in Western Europe. It is true that he killed Duncan, the previous king, but this was the normal, if brutal, method of regime change in Dark Age Scotland. Duncan's rash behaviour, culminating in a humiliating military defeat in northern England, was reason enough to prompt his removal before Scotland's security was further compromised. The reality is that Macbeth quickly established himself as an effective and popular ruler.
As a Celtic warrior-king, he was responsible for the maintenance of his people's dominance of northern Britain. A friend to the Church and valiant protector of his people, the real Macbeth epitomised the contemporary model of vigorous medieval kingship. His fascinating story, long overdue in the telling, is done full justice in Fiona Watson's authoritative and compelling narrative.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2010
10 people are currently reading
178 people want to read
About the author
Fiona Watson
23 books11 followersFiona Watson is a Scottish historian, author and broadcaster. A former senior lecturer at the University of Stirling, she fronted a ten-part BBC television history of Scotland in 2001 and has made numerous radio programmes, including a series on The Enlightenment and another using original sources to highlight the experience of war across the ages entitled Voices from the Front. She is currently a presenter of Making History on BBC Radio 4. Her books include Under the Hammer:Edward I and Scotland, 1286-1307 (1997), Scotland: A History 8000 BC - AD 2000 (2001) and Macbeth: A True Story (2010).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
January 14, 2017
Macbeth. Violent and bloodthirsty tyrant or popular king who reigned in a time of peace and prosperity? Shakespeare's Macbeth was based on Holinshed, as we all know, who in turn based his history on several chronicles all of which were written around 300 years or more after Macbeth's reign. How accurate was his account? Not remotely.
Fiona Watson is an excellent historian. Using an impressive range of primary and secondary sources, she relies on contemporary evidence, scant though it is, to reach the true Macbeth. We don't meet him until around 3/5ths of the way through the book because, in order to understand Macbeth's world in mid 11th century Scotland, we have to learn about the social, political and religious environment at the time, the relationships between the component parts of what would become Scotland and its neighbouring kingdoms, i.e. Ireland, Strathclyde, the Norse ruled lands such as the Northern and Western Isles and much of the west of Scotland, and last but not least England, particularly Northumbria. At no point did I find this in the least tedious as this is such a readable book and I find the subject fascinating.
So what do we know about Macbeth? He was tall, fair, and had a ruddy complexion no doubt resulting from a combination of enthusiastic hunting and carousing. He married his predecessor's widow, Gruoch, and brought up her stepson, Lulach, as his own. His kingdom was so settled and he was such a popular and well supported king that he and his wife were able to undertake a pilgrimage to Rome in 1050 and return to a kingdom that remained his. It is thought that the reason for his journey was to ask the Pope to grant Scotland its own archbishop, rather than coming under the Archbishop of York. The answer was no, however.
For most of Macbeth's reign, the country was peaceful and prosperous. Most remarkably, given that most kings at the time could expect to be murdered by relatives or killed by them or others in battle, Macbeth was able to hand over the throne by choice to Lulach in 1057. Unfortunately, Lulach was killed in battle the following year by the future Malcolm III. Macbeth had no choice but to take up arms again himself and was defeated and killed by Malcolm. It is a measure of the respect in which he was held by his people and by Malcolm that he was allowed to be taken from the battlefield to be buried on Iona.
The way in which Macbeth came to be viewed is diametrically opposed to his reputation in his own lifetime. Why was this? There were many political reasons for this in centuries to come but possibly the most influential damning of his name came from the supporters of the Stuart dynasty who needed to show that theirs was the rightful line. In fact, Henry II's mother, Matilda, was the sister of King David I of Scotland and every English monarch since then has descended from that line. As we know, history is always written by the victors.
I can't recommend this book highly enough. I learned so much about early medieval Europe in addition to uncovering the story of Macbeth. Fiona Watson is not only an excellent historian, she's also an excellent writer and I look forward to reading more of her work.
Fiona Watson is an excellent historian. Using an impressive range of primary and secondary sources, she relies on contemporary evidence, scant though it is, to reach the true Macbeth. We don't meet him until around 3/5ths of the way through the book because, in order to understand Macbeth's world in mid 11th century Scotland, we have to learn about the social, political and religious environment at the time, the relationships between the component parts of what would become Scotland and its neighbouring kingdoms, i.e. Ireland, Strathclyde, the Norse ruled lands such as the Northern and Western Isles and much of the west of Scotland, and last but not least England, particularly Northumbria. At no point did I find this in the least tedious as this is such a readable book and I find the subject fascinating.
So what do we know about Macbeth? He was tall, fair, and had a ruddy complexion no doubt resulting from a combination of enthusiastic hunting and carousing. He married his predecessor's widow, Gruoch, and brought up her stepson, Lulach, as his own. His kingdom was so settled and he was such a popular and well supported king that he and his wife were able to undertake a pilgrimage to Rome in 1050 and return to a kingdom that remained his. It is thought that the reason for his journey was to ask the Pope to grant Scotland its own archbishop, rather than coming under the Archbishop of York. The answer was no, however.
For most of Macbeth's reign, the country was peaceful and prosperous. Most remarkably, given that most kings at the time could expect to be murdered by relatives or killed by them or others in battle, Macbeth was able to hand over the throne by choice to Lulach in 1057. Unfortunately, Lulach was killed in battle the following year by the future Malcolm III. Macbeth had no choice but to take up arms again himself and was defeated and killed by Malcolm. It is a measure of the respect in which he was held by his people and by Malcolm that he was allowed to be taken from the battlefield to be buried on Iona.
The way in which Macbeth came to be viewed is diametrically opposed to his reputation in his own lifetime. Why was this? There were many political reasons for this in centuries to come but possibly the most influential damning of his name came from the supporters of the Stuart dynasty who needed to show that theirs was the rightful line. In fact, Henry II's mother, Matilda, was the sister of King David I of Scotland and every English monarch since then has descended from that line. As we know, history is always written by the victors.
I can't recommend this book highly enough. I learned so much about early medieval Europe in addition to uncovering the story of Macbeth. Fiona Watson is not only an excellent historian, she's also an excellent writer and I look forward to reading more of her work.
March 11, 2015
This is a difficult book to review. On the one hand, it's well written, excellently referenced and approaches a fascinating subject. On the other, it doesn't deliver what it promises.
What you may expect from this when browsing the history section of your bookstore is a biography of Mac Bethad mac Findlaích, king of Alba and the basis for later traditions including Shakespeare's tragic masterpiece. However, what Fiona Watson has produced is less "Macbeth: A True Story" than "Scotland: A True Story". Indeed, the titular king doesn't even appear in Watson's narrative until halfway through, and remains an elusive figure until the end. This has, no doubt, a lot to to with the nature of dark age Scotland. As Watson herself reminds the reader throughout, few accurate sources exist from the time, and conjecture - justified conjecture, no doubt - must be relied upon to fill many gaps. The short passages of italicised fiction in particular helped smooth over a lot of the complicated detail, though it may irk some to find them in a nonfiction book.
While Watson builds a strong picture of Macbeth the king, his life, his reign and his mark on the history of Britain and Europe, I never got much of a sense of Macbeth as a man. Where this book fails as biography, though, it succeeds in narrating the birth of the nation of Scotland, and that's where Watson really captured my imagination and my interest. I enjoyed this book, but not for the reasons I thought I would, and I would recommend it not as the biography of a king, but of a nation.
What you may expect from this when browsing the history section of your bookstore is a biography of Mac Bethad mac Findlaích, king of Alba and the basis for later traditions including Shakespeare's tragic masterpiece. However, what Fiona Watson has produced is less "Macbeth: A True Story" than "Scotland: A True Story". Indeed, the titular king doesn't even appear in Watson's narrative until halfway through, and remains an elusive figure until the end. This has, no doubt, a lot to to with the nature of dark age Scotland. As Watson herself reminds the reader throughout, few accurate sources exist from the time, and conjecture - justified conjecture, no doubt - must be relied upon to fill many gaps. The short passages of italicised fiction in particular helped smooth over a lot of the complicated detail, though it may irk some to find them in a nonfiction book.
While Watson builds a strong picture of Macbeth the king, his life, his reign and his mark on the history of Britain and Europe, I never got much of a sense of Macbeth as a man. Where this book fails as biography, though, it succeeds in narrating the birth of the nation of Scotland, and that's where Watson really captured my imagination and my interest. I enjoyed this book, but not for the reasons I thought I would, and I would recommend it not as the biography of a king, but of a nation.
September 17, 2013
This was a truly fascinating book, and I'm really glad I read it. I would recommend, for anyone who wants to read it, to go ahead and read the introduction first. Read it even if, like me, you find introductions superfluous in general and you typically make it a point not to read them. The introduction is where the author lays out her plan for the book and explains why she formatted it the way she did. As she says, Macbeth was a king who can only be truly understood in context with the world he lived in and the expectations of the Celtic people he ruled. For this reason, the author found it necessary to explain a great deal of Scottish history, the development of the monarchy, and the raging blood feud between royal heirs that was in full effect at the time of Macbeth's birth. Some reviewers have expressed confusion and frustration with Watson's decision to spend the first half of the book elucidating the forces that shaped medieval Scottish politics. The introduction is where she explains why she did this. If you can't bear to read about the history of Scotland, skip to the chapter that begins immediately after the photographs, but keep in mind that you will be utterly lost in the bog of royal genealogy if you don't spend the first half of the book grounding yourself in it.
This book was more challenging than most of the books I read. I found that my usual habit of half-reading, half-skimming, allowing something on the next page to catch my eye and skipping to that point, wouldn't do. I had to read carefully or I would be lost as soon as I turned the page. For the sake of brevity, Watson packs a lot of important information into every page of the book. I really wanted to learn it, so I kept going back and searching the previous page for the information I needed. I'm glad I put that work into it. I feel as if this book has illuminated an important piece of history for me.
History is a field of study that can't avoid being at least a little bit dry, but the author does a stellar job of tempering that dryness with a sparkling writing style, wry humor, and a few passages of fictionalized story that bring the characters to life. Like in the Shakespearean play, the real scene-stealer is Macbeth's wife, a royal princess named Gruoch. She was first married to one of the men who killed Macbeth's father and seized the throne. A few years later, Macbeth did what was expected of any warrior prince of that age, and he returned to avenge his father's death. He successfully killed Gruoch's husband, which left her a widow with a young son. What Gruoch did next seemed, at first, to display a squirm-inducing level of calculation on her part. Reader, she married her husband's murderer. For a long time I didn't really understand. Widows were the most autonomous of Medieval women, having reached a place in life where they were no longer under the control of either a father or a husband, and many widows opted never to remarry because they liked that freedom. So why did Gruoch do it? I didn't understand until much later in the story, when Macbeth tried to go into retirement, and he peaceably handed the reigns of the kingdom over to his stepson. If Gruoch hadn't married Macbeth, her son would have been expected to carry on the feud. he would have had to avenge his father's death by trying to kill Macbeth. By choosing to marry Macbeth, she protected her son from the blood feud that had claimed the life of many, many of her family members, as well as Macbeth's father. Maybe it was even a deal that Macbeth and Gruoch hashed out together. I would be interested to learn more about Gruoch, but I know what if history had anything more to tell us about her, Watson certainly would have included it in the book.
The only thing I felt was really lacking here was the map of Scotland in the time of Macbeth. It frustrated me tremendously. It hardly marked any of the locations, even approximate locations, she mentioned in the book. I found myself turning to it time and again and being disappointed that the geographical area I was reading about wasn't there. Nor did the map have a legend. So when the author toys with the idea that Macbeth may have started his political career as the thane of Cromarty, a reader is left to guess about Cromarty's location in relation to Burghead, and how far young Macbeth would have had to venture from home. I found myself petulantly resisting the idea of just looking up a current map online and seeing if I could learn some Medieval Scottish political geography. The book in my hands had a map. I wanted to conveniently learn it from that map rather than doing my own research. I can only imagine why the author or the publisher decided to include such a feeble map. Maybe Watson humbly assumed that only Scottish people would be interested in reading her book, and they would be familiar with the geography. Either way, I would ask the author to revise the book to include a map that shows me where Cromarty, Cawdor, Fortriu, Iona, Dal Riata, Pitgaveny, The Mounth, and Iona were, at least.
On the other hand, the royal family charts that were included were pretty useful and easy to read. I referred back to them several times.
OK. This is a long review, but the last thing I want to include is my favorite passage from the book. I think it's a good example of the author's writing style and wry humor, and it conveys in a nutshell the sort of information Watson wants to teach her readers throughout the entire book. She talking about the sort of education the young Prince Macbeth would need in order to become a competent king:
"The child also needed knowledge: of the past, which explained who he was and justified how things were in the present; of the law, the myriad of local customs and (still rare) the royal pronouncements which he would be responsible for administering; of poetry and music, the better to praise those who deserved it and appreciate what was offered to him; of games such as draughts and other manly diversions to while away the long winter evenings; and of the complex rules of hospitality, the ability to sustain nights of feasting so that his reputation grew with the tales of them. He must learn how to praise without flattery and admonish without offense. Last but not least, he needed to acquire the ability, though long, hard practice, to drink prodigiously." (2011 paperback version, pg. 128) Hee hee, I'm not at University any more, so I won't reference my quote any more thoroughly than that. Take that, Academia!
TL;DR: this book is awesome, so go read it.
This book was more challenging than most of the books I read. I found that my usual habit of half-reading, half-skimming, allowing something on the next page to catch my eye and skipping to that point, wouldn't do. I had to read carefully or I would be lost as soon as I turned the page. For the sake of brevity, Watson packs a lot of important information into every page of the book. I really wanted to learn it, so I kept going back and searching the previous page for the information I needed. I'm glad I put that work into it. I feel as if this book has illuminated an important piece of history for me.
History is a field of study that can't avoid being at least a little bit dry, but the author does a stellar job of tempering that dryness with a sparkling writing style, wry humor, and a few passages of fictionalized story that bring the characters to life. Like in the Shakespearean play, the real scene-stealer is Macbeth's wife, a royal princess named Gruoch. She was first married to one of the men who killed Macbeth's father and seized the throne. A few years later, Macbeth did what was expected of any warrior prince of that age, and he returned to avenge his father's death. He successfully killed Gruoch's husband, which left her a widow with a young son. What Gruoch did next seemed, at first, to display a squirm-inducing level of calculation on her part. Reader, she married her husband's murderer. For a long time I didn't really understand. Widows were the most autonomous of Medieval women, having reached a place in life where they were no longer under the control of either a father or a husband, and many widows opted never to remarry because they liked that freedom. So why did Gruoch do it? I didn't understand until much later in the story, when Macbeth tried to go into retirement, and he peaceably handed the reigns of the kingdom over to his stepson. If Gruoch hadn't married Macbeth, her son would have been expected to carry on the feud. he would have had to avenge his father's death by trying to kill Macbeth. By choosing to marry Macbeth, she protected her son from the blood feud that had claimed the life of many, many of her family members, as well as Macbeth's father. Maybe it was even a deal that Macbeth and Gruoch hashed out together. I would be interested to learn more about Gruoch, but I know what if history had anything more to tell us about her, Watson certainly would have included it in the book.
The only thing I felt was really lacking here was the map of Scotland in the time of Macbeth. It frustrated me tremendously. It hardly marked any of the locations, even approximate locations, she mentioned in the book. I found myself turning to it time and again and being disappointed that the geographical area I was reading about wasn't there. Nor did the map have a legend. So when the author toys with the idea that Macbeth may have started his political career as the thane of Cromarty, a reader is left to guess about Cromarty's location in relation to Burghead, and how far young Macbeth would have had to venture from home. I found myself petulantly resisting the idea of just looking up a current map online and seeing if I could learn some Medieval Scottish political geography. The book in my hands had a map. I wanted to conveniently learn it from that map rather than doing my own research. I can only imagine why the author or the publisher decided to include such a feeble map. Maybe Watson humbly assumed that only Scottish people would be interested in reading her book, and they would be familiar with the geography. Either way, I would ask the author to revise the book to include a map that shows me where Cromarty, Cawdor, Fortriu, Iona, Dal Riata, Pitgaveny, The Mounth, and Iona were, at least.
On the other hand, the royal family charts that were included were pretty useful and easy to read. I referred back to them several times.
OK. This is a long review, but the last thing I want to include is my favorite passage from the book. I think it's a good example of the author's writing style and wry humor, and it conveys in a nutshell the sort of information Watson wants to teach her readers throughout the entire book. She talking about the sort of education the young Prince Macbeth would need in order to become a competent king:
"The child also needed knowledge: of the past, which explained who he was and justified how things were in the present; of the law, the myriad of local customs and (still rare) the royal pronouncements which he would be responsible for administering; of poetry and music, the better to praise those who deserved it and appreciate what was offered to him; of games such as draughts and other manly diversions to while away the long winter evenings; and of the complex rules of hospitality, the ability to sustain nights of feasting so that his reputation grew with the tales of them. He must learn how to praise without flattery and admonish without offense. Last but not least, he needed to acquire the ability, though long, hard practice, to drink prodigiously." (2011 paperback version, pg. 128) Hee hee, I'm not at University any more, so I won't reference my quote any more thoroughly than that. Take that, Academia!
TL;DR: this book is awesome, so go read it.
October 2, 2024
Like King Richard III, most people probably already know that the Shakespearean Macbeth bares no resembles to the historical person. This book felt a little like the author's PhD dissertation but I still liked it. It was a little dry at times and sometimes confusing. There's a lot of similar names and she would often circle around and go on long tangents about different people and their families. But, overall I did enjoy opening a curtain on a time and place that is shrouded in mystery. If it's a rabbit hole you're looking to jump into this would probably be a good book read.
June 16, 2025
I WANTED to like this book, but I found it extremely frustrating for a reader who did not grow up learning the detailed ancient history of Scotland and Great Britain. Although the author included ONE map of Scotland from the time of Macbeth, it did not show places that she repeatedly referenced as if I should be intimately familiar with them--but I wasn't. Additionally, she wrote about people from the early history of Great Britain who included churchmen of different political factions and chiefs or kings of various small and sometimes short-lived kingdoms. Again, I was forced to search the Internet to get some contextual information about them. It made the book very slow-going. Perhaps there should be a different edition for non-natives of Scotland.
June 26, 2017
Watson's premise is that you can't understand Macbeth until you understand how Scotland had developed politically and culturally up to the 11th century. I found the numerous tribes (where did the Fortriu come from all of a sudden?) and characters, many with the same names, as bewildering as they were in Dorothy Dunnett, which says more about me than about these distinguished authors. But when you finally come to Macbeth himself, the connections with King Hereafter come into play and things begin to fall into place
May 23, 2021
What a marvel this book is to those of us passionate about history. Fiona Watson manages to illuminate the eleventh century with an almost novelistic touch, weaving stories of bloody battles, treacherous kin-slaying, loyal alliances that cross the centuries. . . more than 1,000 years ago!
Macbeth and his Queen Gruoch were nothing like our conception based on Shakespeare's play. Yes, Shakespeare was a genius. But I suspect he was mislead by the historians of the day and.. come on...who can resist a great story, laced with murder and insurmountable guilt!
But that "story" is not history nor is it the true tale of Macbeth and his Queen. Fiona Watson sets us straight.
Macbeth and his Queen Gruoch were nothing like our conception based on Shakespeare's play. Yes, Shakespeare was a genius. But I suspect he was mislead by the historians of the day and.. come on...who can resist a great story, laced with murder and insurmountable guilt!
But that "story" is not history nor is it the true tale of Macbeth and his Queen. Fiona Watson sets us straight.
January 8, 2018
The vast majority of this was detailed (and somewhat distant) background to Macbeth - it took a very long time to get into a discussion of the reign of Macbeth himself, but that's probably unsurprising given the limited evidence, and it was valuable to understand the historical roots of the concerns facing Scottish politics at this time. Overall, it was a useful introduction, but I have to say that it was not the most gripping read.
June 2, 2018
It took ages to actually get to Macbeth - most of the book was background, which is great, but if you're writing about Macbeth it would be nice if at least a slim majority of the book dealt with that subject more directly.
July 17, 2020
Very helpful for understanding who the real Macbeth was and the motivation for the rewriting in history -and of the appeal of this rewrite in Shakespeare's time. I had to watch a lot of history videos to understand the book. Celtic people, Picts, British history.
June 7, 2023
An interesting topic and well researched book. The author clearly assumes that reader have some background on Medieval Scottish and European history, so I would not suggest other books on Scottish history before reading this one.
November 3, 2011
In Macbeth: A True Story, Fiona Watson portrays Macbeth as a king that was popular and largely successful under prosperous times during his reign. This is in contrast to the Macbeth portrayed by Shakespeare which shows Macbeth to be an unpopular king that unrightfully took the throne through murder and betrayal. Throughout the book there are italicized sections of fiction which have scenes that show the possible scenarios and events of the times, and pictures in the middle of landmarks and objects relating to the history.
Macbeth ruled Scotland between 1040 and 1057. Part One – The Forging of a kingdom was about the history before Macbeth became king, showing the environment where a violent deposing was the norm when changing kings. Part Two – The making of a king would be more interesting for people interested in Macbeth coming from reading Shakespeare. It has about how he came to be king, and how he came to be demonised in the future, by about 1600 when Shakespeare’s Macbeth was being performed.
Macbeth ruled Scotland between 1040 and 1057. Part One – The Forging of a kingdom was about the history before Macbeth became king, showing the environment where a violent deposing was the norm when changing kings. Part Two – The making of a king would be more interesting for people interested in Macbeth coming from reading Shakespeare. It has about how he came to be king, and how he came to be demonised in the future, by about 1600 when Shakespeare’s Macbeth was being performed.
August 21, 2014
I found this a fascinating look at this period of Scotland. Although at times it does read like a textbook, that didn't bother me. I've read Dorothy Dunnett's King Hereafter, a fiction version of MacBeth, which I'll review at another time, and can see that both authors did extensive research to bring the legendary king to life. I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in 11th Century live. Imagine what it would be like to travel from Scotland to Rome at that time. While Shakespeare wrote a politically correct play for the English Court, it's obvious that MacBeth's villainy was just that: political. MacBeth was buried on Iona, with other Scottish kings. This wouldn't have happened if the real Maelbaethe were the villain Shakespeare painted him.
January 17, 2012
I can't quite bring myself to call this a biography, not when you find yourself halfway through the book and Mac Bethad mac Findlaich (Macbeth) hasn't even been born yet. However, that doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile read. Watson supplies a lot of political, religious and cultural background information leading up to Macbeth's reign from 1040 - 1057. Reality is nothing like the Scottish Play as it turns out and even though Macbeth is one of those people we simply don't know that much about (so there is a lot of "perhaps" and "maybe"), the author manages to pull together a picture of a fascinating period in Scottish history.
September 13, 2012
Excellent book. The author brings to life the historical MacBeth, how he managed to have a peaceful and prosperous reign, went on a pilgramage to Rome with his queen, and how his people mourned his death. He is the only Scottish monarch to make such a pilgramage and his successors were too busy putting down revolts to contemplate it. Shakespeare's creature came to be long after MacBeth's Canmore successors' line itself was extinct.
May 29, 2012
I wanted to like this more than I did. While there were some sparkling moments, I found myself struggling to engage in the many, many characters that made up the complicated political world of 12th Century Scotland. Also, MacBeth did not appear until more than half way through the book, which was tough when he was the character I was most interested in reading about.
Want to read
February 18, 2012Library Journals's recommended to purchase or not.... Only for armchair historians of the Middle Ages, fans of Shakespeare's "Scottish play," and readers of historical fiction ---- That is all --- so ME!
March 29, 2017
Really liked it simply because it talks about the real Macbeth and not the fictional Shakespeare Macbeth, which are two entirely different characters. The first one really existed and the second is a composite of different kings and given the name of a real king. Watson has brought the real Macbeth to life and he was a very different king, not the bloodthirsty tyrant but someone who managed to unify Pictish and Gaelic Scotland. I recommend this book if you want to read more about the real character.
Read
December 21, 2017Love Scottish history, especially this time frame up to 1200 a.d., this is about more than Macbeth.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews