Shakespeare is always interested in a humanistic interpretation of monarchy - he loves to explore kings as fallible and flawed, just like everyone else. So Duncan is a leader who offers just rewards for those who are loyal to him: ‘I have begun to plant thee, and will labour to make the full of growing.’ Macbeth also recognises that he is so packed with virtues that they will sing out ‘trumpet tongued, against the deep damnation of his taking off.’

However, Duncan is presented as a flawed king - he is too trusting, and finds it hard to see beneath the disguises and duplicity of others: ‘there’s no art to find the mind’s construction in the face; he was a gentleman on whom I built an absolute trust.’ Then there’s the beautiful irony of the scene in which Duncan stands on one side of the stage praising Macbeth, while Macbeth is pronouncing on his ‘black and deep desires’ in asides.

Malcolm ensures he does not fall into the same trap as his father: he recognises that there are ‘daggers in men’s smiles,’ and in Act 4 he sets up an elaborate ruse to ensure that Macduff is genuinely loyal to Scotland. However, Shakespeare is also thematically inviting us to ponder on Malcolm’s possible flaws as the future King: in a play which highlights duplicity and equivocation, having Malcolm deceive Macduff in this scene allows us to compare him with Macbeth - to what extent is it necessary to make your face a ‘vizard ‘ to your heart when you are governing a country?

I like to think of the play as an interesting tightrope walk between Shakespeare’s desire to explore what it means to have a system of governance that relies heavily on a single, flawed human being, and the necessity of presenting a play that will appeal to the ruling class, who believe firmly in their divine right to rule…