If Dee possessed this knowledge, it is not unreasonable to assume that Shakespeare, like his intellectual associates, had some magical knowledge; certainly enough to establish that King James’ accusations of body-part use in magic were a fallacy. Sir Robert Cecil was a short man claimed affectionately by Elizabeth to be her ‘elf’, when communicating with Dee, Cecil sent ‘William Hall, a mysterious figure who some have speculated was William Shakespeare under an alias’. This, accompanied by the time in which he lived, is evidence that Shakespeare was aware of such investigation into magic. However, references to James 1st’s Daemonologie are throughout the play,

"It will have blood, they say: blood will have blood" (3.4.122-96)

This fear of Macbeth’s can be illuminated by Wilson referring to James’ work, For as in a secret Murther, if the dead carkasse bee at any time thereafter handled by the murtherer, it will gush out bloud, as if the bloud were crying to heauen for the reuenge of the murtherer.

Willis likens Macbeth to Sir Edward Kelley, an associate of John Dee, by some thought to be a mere conman, stating that Macbeth appealed to the ‘witches in the name of their art, of their dark knowledge, no matter what its source.’ If Shakespeare was referring to Kelley, then surely the character of Macbeth himself would have more than this in common with him. Perhaps in his nature, a tenuous link to Kelley can be found, but there is more to the portrayal of Macbeth. The witchcraft that surrounds Macbeth is the revealing tool used by Shakespeare to establish Macbeth’s true character. This is evident if we examine some anomalies, that is, that which seems exaggerated or inaccurate within the play.

The sisters do not cast a traditional circle, nor do they have an implement of magic such as a wand, athame, broom or indeed, a staff like Prospero in The Tempest. They circle the cauldron, using somewhat overdramatic chanting and dancing, which has been marked, if not as overdramatic, then as unique in Shakespeare’s text. With the exception of Yew, a tree synonymous with death, and hemlock, a poison, the spell ingredients are animal parts. Witchcraft is more inclined to the use of herbs and plants, for instance, ‘wing of bat’ is not an actual wing but a holly leaf. The ingredients are mainly symbolic and little evidence against this, other than after the time of King James 1st, can be established. Another histrionic aspect of the play is a tribute to James 1st,

"The mere despair of surgery, he cures;
 Hanging a golden stamp on their necks,
 Put on with holy prayers: and ‘tis spoken,
 To the succeeding royalty he leaves
 The healing benediction. With this strange virtue,
 He hath the heavenly gift of prophecy;
 And sundry blessings hang about his throne,
 That speak him full of grace."
(4.3.152-131)

James was said to have a healing touch, which he ‘ascribed’ to prayer. This king also claimed in his speech to parliament that, ‘kings are justly called Gods, for that they exercise a manner or resemblance of Divine power upon earth.’ This is tantamount to claiming he is himself a God. This was a somewhat megalomaniac statement surely even in Shakespeare’s time. However, it is reflected in Macbeth, and might be taken seriously but for the line, ‘heavenly gift of prophecy’. This is the service which is performed by the weird sisters for Macbeth. The ‘gift’ of prophecy referred to as ‘heavenly’ when associated which the king, highlights the hypocrisy in James’ preaching. With this in mind, the ‘sundry blessings’ which ‘hang about his throne’ and ‘speak him full of grace’ could be perceived as those surrounding James, speaking of him in the same sycophantic manner found in this part of the text. It is allusions such as these which suggest that Macbeth is not a serious tragedy, but a satire of the anti-witchcraft England so rapidly created by James 1st, not only this, but the man himself. His arrogance, paranoia, and his use of the witches as tools, much as James used witchcraft to glorify and sanctify himself, can all be found in Macbeth. This is the genius of Shakespeare, his personal magical skill. In a trick of the eye he appears to be a supporter of the king, agreeing with his inflated opinion of himself and portrayal of magic as evil, and anti-Christian. However, much evidence in the play suggests the contrary, which could well have been Shakespeare’s true view. Had King James 1st been acquainted with genuine pagan magic, not his twisted perception of it, Shakespeare would have been unable to perform this skilful illusion, right before his eyes. The true opinion of the playwright concerning magic may be more evident in The Tempest, ‘the last of the plays attributable wholly or mainly to Shakespeare’.