Banquo - Source

Source

Shakespeare often used Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland—commonly known as Holinshed's Chronicles—as a source for his plays, and in Macbeth he borrows from several of the tales in that work. Holinshed portrays Banquo as an historical figure: he is an accomplice in Mac Bethad mac Findlaích's (Macbeth's) murder of Donnchad mac Crínáin (King Duncan) and plays an important part in ensuring that Macbeth, not Máel Coluim mac Donnchada (Malcolm), takes the throne in the coup that follows. Holinshed in turn used an earlier work, the Scotorum Historiae (1526–7) by Hector Boece, as his source. Boece's work is the first known record of Banquo and his son Fleance; and scholars such as David Bevington generally consider them fictional characters invented by Boece. In Shakespeare's day, however, they were considered historical figures of great repute, and the king, James I, based his claim to the throne in part on a descent from Banquo. The House of Stuart was descended from Walter fitz Alan, the first High Steward of Scotland, and he was believed to have been the grandson of Fleance and Gruffydd ap Llywelyn's daughter, Nesta verch Gruffydd. In reality Walter fitz Alan was the son of a Breton knight.

Unlike his sources, Shakespeare gives Banquo no role in the King's murder, making it a deed committed solely by Macbeth and his wife. Why Shakespeare's Banquo is so different from the character described by Holinshed and Boece is not known, though critics have proposed several possible explanations. First among them is the risk associated with portraying the king's ancestor as a murderer and conspirator in the plot to overthrow a rightful king, as well as the author's desire to flatter a powerful patron. But Shakespeare may also simply have altered Banquo's character because there was no dramatic need for another accomplice to the murder. There was, however, a need to provide a dramatic contrast to Macbeth; a role that many scholars argue is filled by Banquo. Similarly, when Jean de Schelandre wrote about Banquo in his Stuartide in 1611, he also changed the character by portraying him as a noble and honourable man—the critic D. W. Maskell describes him as “…Schelandre's paragon of valour and virtue”—probably for reasons similar to Shakespeare's.

Banquo's role in the coup that follows the murder is harder to explain. Banquo's loyalty to Macbeth, rather than Malcolm, after Duncan's death makes him a passive accomplice in the coup: Malcolm, as Prince of Cumberland, is the rightful heir to the throne and Macbeth a usurper. Daniel Amneus, however, argues that when Ross and Angus bring King Duncan's praise, and the news that Macbeth has been granted the title of Thane of Cawdor, the "greater honor" he ascribes to Macbeth is actually his title as Prince of Cumberland. If Macbeth, rather than Malcolm, is Prince of Cumberland then Macbeth would be next in line to the throne and no coup would be needed, effectively removing this ambiguity from Banquo's character.