Fate Vs Free Will In Macbeth

The entirety of Shakespeare’s Macbeth hinges on the prophecy set forth by the witches at the beginning of the play. Likewise, many of the events in Act 3 comply with their predictions, illustrating that the actions undergone by key characters are a result of fate, rather than free will. Specifically, at the beginning of the act, Banquo brings up the “king, Cawdor, Glamis, all / As the Weïrd Women promised, and I fear / Thou played’st most foully for ’t” (3.1.1-3). In this instance, Lord Banquo acknowledges that if Macbeth actually killed Duncan, it would fulfill the witches’ prophecies. This leads him to fear that perhaps his future has already been envisaged by the three magical beings, and nothing he does is an outcome of free will.

Furthermore,

Macbeth’s statement that “prophet-like, / They hailed him father to a line of kings. / Upon my head they placed a fruitless crown / And put a barren scepter in my grip, / Thence to be wrenched with an unlineal hand, / No son of mine succeeding” demonstrates his understanding of the prophecy’s validity, and urges him to prevent Banquo’s children from becoming the future kings (3.1.64-69). In essence, Macbeth needs to halt the predictions from coming true in order to have autonomy over his fate.
Additionally, Macbeth appoints three murderers to kill individuals who pose a threat to his authority. This demonstrates that he is not very courageous, as he hires somebody to do the dirty deeds for him. However, not everything works out to plan. This can be seen when the murderers converse, and it is established that “[there’s] but one down. The son is fled. We have lost best half of our affair” (3. 3.29-33). Banquo’s son running away exhibits how Macbeth is unable to change fate, and everything goes according to the witches’ plans.