Macbeth extract question

One question, one sustained argument

The Shakespeare question asks you to develop an interpretation, support it with evidence and explain how Shakespeare creates meaning. Your answer should be an argument about the play, rather than a retelling of its plot.

In AQA Paper 1, Section A contains one question for each set play. Answer the question on the play you have studied: there is no choice of questions within that play. The examination is closed book, but an extract is printed in the paper. You must write in detail about that extract and also discuss the play as a whole.

Paper 1 lasts 1 hour 45 minutes and also includes the nineteenth-century novel. Allowing roughly 50 minutes for Shakespeare is a useful planning choice, not a separate time limit imposed by AQA.

What the assessment objectives reward

The literature answer carries 30 marks, covering three assessment objectives:

These work together. For example, an argument that Macbeth’s courage becomes destructive can use his commands as evidence, analyse their threatening language and consider the difference between defending a kingdom and ruling through fear.

There are also 4 marks for AO4 in Section A. These reward accurate spelling and punctuation, together with vocabulary and sentence structures that control meaning effectively. Grammar therefore matters as part of clear, controlled expression. Four marks require consistent accuracy and effective control; two or three reflect considerable accuracy and general control; one reflects reasonable accuracy, with errors not hindering meaning.

The June 2023 question and its extract

Section A: Shakespeare

Answer one question from this section on your chosen text.

01 Macbeth

Read the following extract from Act 5 Scene 3 of Macbeth and then answer the question that follows.

At this point in the play, Macbeth hears that the English army is approaching and asks the Doctor for a report about Lady Macbeth.

MACBETH Seyton! – I am sick at heart,
When I behold – Seyton, I say! – this push
Will cheer me ever or disseat me now.
I have lived long enough. My way of life
Is fall’n into the sere, the yellow leaf,
And that which should accompany old age,
As honour, love, obedience, troops of friends,
I must not look to have; but in their stead,
Curses, not loud but deep, mouth-honour, breath
Which the poor heart would fain deny, and dare not.
Seyton!

Enter SEYTON

SEYTON What’s your gracious pleasure?
MACBETH What news more?
SEYTON All is confirmed, my lord, which was reported.
MACBETH I’ll fight till from my bones my flesh be hacked.
Give me my armour.
SEYTON ’Tis not needed yet.
MACBETH I’ll put it on;
Send out more horses; skirr the country round.
Hang those that talk of fear. Give me mine armour.
How does your patient, doctor?
DOCTOR Not so sick, my lord,
As she is troubled with thick-coming fancies
That keep her from her rest.
MACBETH Cure her of that.
Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased,
Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow,
Raze out the written troubles of the brain,
And with some sweet oblivious antidote
Cleanse the stuffed bosom of that perilous stuff
Which weighs upon the heart?

01 Starting with this conversation, explore how far Shakespeare presents Macbeth as a male character who changes during the play.

Write about:

• how Shakespeare presents Macbeth in this conversation
• how far Shakespeare presents Macbeth as a male character who changes in the play as a whole.

[30 marks]
AO4 [4 marks]

“How far” invites a judgement: you can argue that Macbeth changes greatly, that some qualities remain, or that change and continuity exist together. A focused exploration of change, masculinity, or both can answer this question.

“Sere” means dry or withered; “disseat” means remove from a position of authority; “skirr” means move rapidly through. Macbeth fears defeat, recognises his isolation and still prepares to fight.

Reading and annotating with a purpose

Read the question before selecting evidence. Then use the introduction above the extract to locate the scene within the play. Here, the final-act setting matters: Macbeth has already gained the crown, committed further murders and lost support. His fighting spirit must be understood alongside his desperation.

Annotations should connect detail → meaning → argument, rather than merely label techniques:

• “the yellow leaf”: withering imagery suggests decline; compare his earlier public honour with his present emptiness.
• “honour, love, obedience, troops of friends”: the list identifies what power has failed to provide; distinguish genuine loyalty from frightened submission.
• “hacked”: graphic violence recalls the opening battle; consider whether violence itself changes or its purpose changes.
• “Hang those that talk of fear”: an imperative threatens his own people; compare the defender of Scotland with its tyrant.
• “Cure her of that”: a command attempts to control inward suffering; consider both concern for his wife and his inability to undo guilt.

You do not need to analyse every line. Select details that allow you to develop a connected interpretation.

Turning observations into a plan

A thesis states your overall answer. For this question, a useful thesis is:

Shakespeare presents Macbeth as changing from an honoured defender into an isolated tyrant. His capacity for violence persists, but ambition changes its moral purpose and destroys the relationships that once gave him status.

This gives the essay direction without pretending that Macbeth is simply brave at the beginning and cowardly at the end.

A brief plan could look like this:

Each paragraph needs a claim, supporting evidence and an explanation of how Shakespeare’s choices support that claim. Relevant context can be woven into this explanation. For instance, a ruler’s responsibility to protect others makes Macbeth’s attacks on innocent people especially revealing.

There is no single required order. You can begin with the extract and move outwards, trace developments chronologically, or organise the answer around different aspects of the character. The important thing is to develop an argument about both extract and whole play.

Model answer: change in the purpose of violence

Introduction

Shakespeare presents Macbeth as a male character who changes profoundly in his loyalties, relationships and moral judgement, although his capacity for violence remains. The extract shows a warrior still determined to fight, but stripped of the honour that once made his courage valuable. Through this contrast, Shakespeare explores how ambition turns strength into tyranny: Macbeth gains political authority while losing the trust, companionship and inward security that might make power worthwhile.

Developing the argument

In the extract, Macbeth’s declaration, “I’ll fight till from my bones my flesh be hacked”, preserves his identity as a fighter. The graphic verb “hacked” imagines his body violently dismantled, suggesting determination even when survival is unlikely. This recalls the Sergeant’s account in Act 1 Scene 2, before Macbeth appears, that he “unseam’d” Macdonwald. Shakespeare initially establishes Macbeth through another soldier’s admiration, presenting violence as service to Duncan and Scotland. By Act 5, however, Macbeth fights to preserve his own position. His physical courage has not disappeared, but its moral direction has changed. The same capacity that once defended the kingdom now prolongs its suffering.

This transformation becomes clearer in “Hang those that talk of fear”. The imperative makes killing a response not to armed rebellion but to speech. Macbeth now threatens the people over whom he rules, suggesting that his authority depends on terror rather than willing loyalty. The command also exposes insecurity: suppressing expressions of fear cannot remove the approaching army. In Act 4 Scene 1, Macbeth similarly orders an attack on Macduff’s wife and children after learning that Macduff has escaped. These victims are not battlefield opponents. Shakespeare therefore distinguishes the courage praised within a military setting from violence exercised against the vulnerable. Macbeth’s strength becomes destructive because protection has been replaced by self-preservation.

Earlier, Macbeth recognises limits to acceptable action. In Act 1 Scene 7, he tells Lady Macbeth, “I dare do all that may become a man; / Who dares do more is none.” Here, manhood includes moral restraint rather than limitless aggression. His soliloquy has already acknowledged obligations to Duncan as kinsman, subject and host. Allowing the audience to hear these private objections makes the murder a conscious betrayal, not an action performed without understanding. Lady Macbeth’s reply, “When you durst do it, then you were a man”, recasts masculinity as willingness to kill. Shakespeare presents competing definitions of manhood, revealing how the desire to prove courage can undermine the judgement that should govern it.

By the middle of the play, Macbeth increasingly adopts this coercive understanding of masculinity. In Act 3 Scene 1, he challenges the murderers’ standing as men while persuading them to kill Banquo. Structurally, the man previously pressured by his wife becomes the person pressuring others. He also plans the murder without giving Lady Macbeth full knowledge, telling her in Act 3 Scene 2, “Be innocent of the knowledge, dearest chuck”. This contrasts with the letter she reads in Act 1 Scene 5, in which he calls her “my dearest partner of greatness”. “Partner” suggests shared ambition, whereas withholding knowledge gives Macbeth control. Nevertheless, the affectionate “dearest” complicates any claim that he has simply stopped loving her.

The extract similarly allows more than one reading of Macbeth as a husband. “Cure her of that” might sound impatient, as though Lady Macbeth’s suffering were another problem to be removed by command. Yet his extended questions about a “mind diseased” and “rooted sorrow” suggest that he recognises the depth of mental pain. “Rooted” makes sorrow seem embedded rather than easily detachable. This connects with his own statement in Act 3 Scene 2, “O, full of scorpions is my mind, dear wife!” The threatening creatures turn thought into inward torment. Although Macbeth becomes more decisive in ordering violence, he does not thereby become secure. Shakespeare suggests that authority over others cannot guarantee mastery of conscience.

Macbeth’s recognition of loss is concentrated in “the yellow leaf”. The image associates his life with withering, replacing achievement with decline. In the surrounding blank verse, the list “honour, love, obedience, troops of friends” gives space to the human rewards he now lacks. Its contrast with “mouth-honour” separates genuine respect from words spoken under pressure. Macbeth can demand obedience, but cannot manufacture affection. This failure exposes the difference between possessing a crown and fulfilling the relationships and responsibilities of kingship. The religious understanding of royal authority is made explicit when Macduff calls Duncan “The Lord’s anointed temple” in Act 2 Scene 3. Macbeth’s betrayal thus violates a sacred bond, not merely a political alliance; his subsequent isolation reveals the cost of destroying legitimate authority.

Conclusion

Ultimately, Macbeth changes most in what his violence serves and what it costs him. His final refusal to surrender to Macduff in Act 5 Scene 8 confirms that determination survives even after supernatural reassurance collapses. However, continuing to fight does not restore his former honour. Shakespeare’s tragedy presents courage without moral restraint as insufficient: Macbeth retains the warrior’s strength while destroying the bonds that once gave that strength a worthy purpose.

Commentary on the model answer

A strict best-fit judgement would place this model in Level 6, towards the lower end of 26–30 marks.

• AO1: it sustains a central interpretation, evaluates both change and continuity, and selects precise evidence from the extract, beginning, middle and end.
• AO2: it explores words and images, but also dramatic presentation, soliloquy, verse and structural parallels. Methods support the argument rather than form a disconnected list.
• AO3: it connects violence to military service, moral obligations, competing ideas of masculinity and responsibilities of kingship. The reference to Duncan as God’s anointed king makes the religious significance of Macbeth’s betrayal explicit and connects it to his later loss of genuine loyalty.

Its strongest feature is the distinction between continuing violence and changing moral purpose. The discussion of Macbeth as a husband also weighs two readings against evidence. Further fine-grained development of form and dramatic effects would strengthen a claim to the very top of the mark range. Its accurate, controlled expression would support 4 AO4 marks.

Notice how the introduction supplies the overall judgement, while the body paragraphs test and develop it. The discussion of Act 3 explains the transition between the early and late Macbeth, rather than jumping straight from the beginning to the ending. The conclusion returns to the opening distinction between strength and its moral purpose, now supported by the essay’s evidence.

Comparing a clear paragraph with an exploratory paragraph

The labels below indicate useful Grade 5-style and Grade 8-style writing goals. A GCSE grade comes from performance across the qualification; AQA marks this answer using levels.

Both paragraphs make a relevant claim, use evidence and explain change. The second develops a tension between apparent control and actual insecurity, then uses the opening of the play to refine its judgement. Improvement comes from deeper reasoning, not simply longer sentences or more terminology.

Using the time and writing clearly

For a roughly 50-minute answer, one workable allocation is 5 minutes reading and annotating, 5 minutes planning, 35 minutes writing and 5 minutes checking. Adjust this through timed practice; it is a suggested method, not an AQA rule.

During planning, select enough whole-play evidence to develop the argument beyond the extract. During writing, give the extract close attention without allowing line-by-line commentary to consume the whole answer. There is no fixed percentage split: balance means doing both parts meaningfully.

Begin paragraphs with claims, then explain and analyse the evidence needed to establish them. Use connections such as “whereas”, “however” and “therefore” to make the reasoning explicit. A brief conclusion should deliver the judgement your evidence supports.

Finally, read for meaning as well as spelling. For example, “Macbeth’s commands reveal his insecurity” is a complete sentence with a possessive apostrophe. Controlled Standard English makes your interpretation easier to follow and helps secure AO4 marks.

Task and marks

• Paper 1 Section A: one question on your studied play; no question choice within that play.
• Closed book: the extract is provided.
• Discuss the extract and the whole play.
• 30 marks: AO1 12, AO2 12, AO3 6; 4 additional AO4 marks.
• Paper 1 lasts 1 hour 45 minutes. Roughly 50 minutes for Shakespeare is a practical allocation, not an official section limit.

Build the argument

1. Identify the question’s focus and locate the extract within the play.
2. Form a thesis answering the question.
3. Select extract details and connected whole-play moments.
4. Develop claims through evidence, analysis and relevant contextual ideas.
5. Conclude with a supported judgement.

What earns marks

• AO1: focused interpretation and precise references.
• AO2: how language, form and structure create meaning.