The magic used in Shakespeare’s plays spans over the reign of two monarchs. After the death of Elizabeth 1st, James 1st became King of England. The belief in magic remained, however, after 1603, a society led by King James found its Pagan beliefs demonised, and ‘lost its playful interaction with nature’. He not only made it terrifying, but also ‘forcibly maintained’ the belief in witchcraft. Indeed, from his original place as King of Scotland, James was said to participate in a ‘series of witch trials from 1590 in which some 300 people were charged with witchcraft’. It is surmised he was influenced by the European ‘witch craze’ having spent time in Denmark; his ‘accusations included plots to raise storms’ and kill him as he travelled by sea. Soon after he was crowned King of England, James passed laws which made practicing witchcraft punishable by death. He revised the Bible so that anyone who ‘practiced bad magic, or poisoned others’ was referred to as ‘witch’. This ‘may have been done as a deliberate act of propaganda’ but whatever the case, it has been detrimental to witchcraft and magic. Christians today, ‘can still cite the passage at Exodus 22:18 which in the King James Bible reads, ‘Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.’

King James 1st perpetuated and in time, solidified the connection of witches and witchcraft to malevolence. Whether people were conspiring against him, or if he was merely paranoid and fearful of that which he did not understand we do not know. We do know that James altered the perception of magic to the extent that his influence remains in Christian doctrine today. There is evidence to suggest that he not only made society afraid, but also burdened it with his obsession,

His wondering subjects had their eyes opened to the fact that not a child could talk incoherently or fall into a fit, not a harvest could fail or a vessel be wrecked at sea, not a scarecrow or grimalkin could cross one’s path after dark, but the devil had some hand in it, with a sorceress as his agent.

Toddler’s tantrums and lack of eloquence, failure to reap good harvest, sunken ships, scarecrows and old cats, all the fault of a witch, spurred on by the devil. Any misfortune that society had to endure was laid at the feet of the witch. This blame philosophy was convenient to the likes of physicians who, if unable to diagnose a problem, would claim that the patient was ‘bewitched’. Witchcraft became the scapegoat of Jacobean society.

Shakespeare was undoubtedly conscious of his surroundings, and therefore had to be influenced by these occurrences. This is evident when observing the magic in his plays. The use of the craft and folklore in his work ranges from comedic to evil, from evil to neutral. Shakespeare adapted his portrayal of magic to his surroundings, encompassing that which was popular opinion at the time. A prudent thing to do as it would have pleased the audiences, and in the reign of King James 1st, could very well have kept his status, not to mention, his existence, intact. Did Shakespeare’s own opinion of magic change with the times as it would seem, or did he portray views other than his own to amuse and gratify his audience, and therefore be admired and wealthy? Or as Shakespeare put it, change his ‘state with kings’ (Sonnets, 29, p22). It is acceptable to think so, he was after all a playwright, and made his living from his occupation, namely entertainment. In the playwright’s work we witness him manipulate magic skilfully to fit his purpose. This makes him a literary magus, a magician with words, but there are clues to suggest his ties with magic did not exist only in his works,

"O learn to read what silent love hath writ!
 To hear with thine eyes belongs to love’s fine wit!"
(Sonnets, 23, p21)