The humanism of the Renaissance is also described as the age of the individual, since it especially emphasized the dignity and value of the individual.
The human, with all his respective emotions and perceptions, was now placed into the center of society and the universe, and during this discovery of the individual, the individual personality progressively moved into the foreground (Unterstenhöfer, p.48, l.1-2).
However, the term ‘individual’ initially had a different meaning than it has today: “Individual […] referred to that which is one in substance or essence, indivisible, or that which is inseparable from a whole. It did not have the meaning now given to the word as signifying a sense of self-identity, for which the O.E.D. cites the first use in 1633.“ (Ferry, p.34, l.42ff.) This transition from “essence” to “self-identity” can, already in the beginning, be seen in Shakespeare’s depiction of Macbeth.
What rated as the perfect example of the ‘new type’ of human that emerged in the Renaissance, who was now understood as an individual with an own unique identity, was Shakespeare’s Hamlet, whom the poet let express his innermost feelings and experiences on stage for the first time:
“The great symbol and epitome of this new state of being in the Renaissance is Hamlet. His consciousness of playing a part which is in some sense alien to his real self finds innumerable echoes in contemporary literature.“ (Delany, p.12, ll.2-6).
In this context it is also what accounts for Shakespeare’s greatness to, for the first time, bring the just mentioned “self-identity” onto the Elizabethan stage. Anne Ferry names further features that amount to Hamlet as an individual and that certainly can also be transferred to the, shortly thereafter created, character of Macbeth. Namely, she states that “His opening aside, his first speech, his many soliloquys, his references to what is hidden in his heart all seem designed to present him as an individual aware of having what a modern writer would call an inner life or a real self.” (Ferry p.29, l.36-39).
Further intentions of humanism were the ‘burst’ of class- and national barriers as well as the gradual emancipation from the mental/spiritual limitations caused by an all too authoritarian value- and moral system of the church, or rather religion. This emancipation also entailed the concept of an individual identity.
From a traditionally conservative viewpoint of the Middle Ages concerning a now emancipating individualism, the church still denied the concept of the ‘individual’, since humans were not supposed to innerly see themselves as autonomous and rationally-thinking beings – which was perceived as revolutionary, maybe even seditious – but to act as obedient servants of God and the state who only define, or rather fulfill, themselves through the collective mass of devout Christians.
While humanism strives for the human’s autonomy through power over himself, here in Macbeth the tyrant now becomes the counter-violence through power over others, whose right to self-determination he certainly restricts, or even eliminates, through his mostly aggressive exercise of power, and thus reverses this new development. This constitutes a substitution experience, which modern psychology confirms as well (see Unterstenhöfer, p.192, l.27-31).
“The unmistakable dynamic quality of Elizabethan tragedy comes from the discovery of the individual human character, from a burning interest in its potentialities for good and evil, its corruptibility as well as its exhilarating power to inspire and impress.” (Mehl, p.5, l.26-29).
Nevertheless its emergence was only made possible by the humanistic interest in the fate and psychology of the individual human and the model of Seneca’s tragedies (Fabian (Vol.1), p.391, l.35-37). Similar as with Seneca, whose tragedies were significant for the birth of the Elizabethan tragedy and had great influence on it, the tyrant Macbeth is constantly forced to commit new terrible felonies due to the unnaturalness of his reign. With that, he and his crimes are demonized – a development that culminates in the great tragedies of Shakespeare (Unterstenhöfer, p.192, l.20-26).
The influence of the Senecan Tragedies also becomes effective in Macbeth insofar as that the tragic fall is caused by the hero being incapable of controlling his fierce passions and emotions with his mind – he thus becomes a “slave of passion” (Schabert, p.544, l.16-21). In contrast to the model of Seneca, who equipped his protagonists with an overriding passion – so that they would end up in madness or fury, such as Atreus in Thyestes – the Elizabethan tragedy rather focuses on how the human ‘functions’ in general.
Elizabethan Psychology
Possessing an all too strong imagination was, according to Elizabethan beliefs, perceived as negative and, therefore, had to be avoided by all means since it was thought “that successful action depends upon a well regulated soul and that any departure from the governance of reason is dangerous, […].” (Anderson, p.162, l.10-12).
“The supremacy of the imagination, of the affections, or a conjunction of the two […] is nearly always fatal to an individual; hence this supremacy becomes a dominant force leading to tragedy.” (Anderson, p.172, ll.8-15).
Besides, the clerical doctrine of sin of that time was not familiar with ‘individual’ sinners in the sense of ‘self-identity’. By means of the confession manual – a catalogue of sins, developed in the 15th century, that is oriented towards the Ten Commandments and prepares for confession – for the first time an autobiographic ‘personality’ emerged which, at that time, was imagined as a composition of single virtues and sins.