Posted in Historical articles , History , London , Royalty , Scotland on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 Click on any image for details about licensing for commercial or personal use. This edited article about James I originally appeared in Look and Learn issue number 140 published on 19 September 1964. Guy Fawkes is brought before James I by C L Doughty Sir Walter Scott, the novelist, said of King James the First that he was “exceedingly like an old gander, running about and cackling all manner of nonsense.” Someone else called James “the wisest fool in Christendom.” Both quotations are very apt, for James, in summary, was learned yet ridiculous, clumsy, clownish, awkward, feeble and blustering. And yet his reign lacks no interest. It was the first of the House of Stuart, the unhappiest royal family in England’s story; it united for the first time England and Scotland; it saw the opening stages of the long struggle between the King and the House of Commons in which the Commons were to emerge as the final victors.

It was the reign, too, of the Gunpowder Plot; the English re-translation of the Bible – King James’s Bible – which we still use today; the unhappy execution of Sir Walter Raleigh and the meteoric rise to power of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, the most worthless man who ever donned a peer’s ermine. James was fourteen months old when he became King James the Sixth of Scotland at the execution of his mother, Mary Queen of Scots, by Queen Elizabeth of England. He was four years old when he made one of the very rare pronouncements of his life that were to impress his subjects. The occasion was the opening of the Scottish Parliament. In those days the Scots liked to have their king on view, no matter how young he was, so James, at four, was obliged to perform the royal opening before the M.P.s. From his throne the little fellow silently and curiously summed up his surroundings, and among other things he noticed a hole in the roof of the hall, where probably a slate had slipped.

When he was required to make his speech he recited it with astonishing gravity and precision, and added to it, in the same tone, the words, “There is one hole in this parliament.” The dour Scottish M.P.s were immediately besides themselves with horror and consternation. With no thought of looking upwards to see the obvious cause of the remark they concluded that little James had prophetically foreseen some great disaster that would befall one of them. When in the same year the Regent of Scotland, the Earl of Lennox, was violently assassinated, they decided that this justified the omen and that James was a remarkable juvenile prophet indeed. In fact, James spent the rest of his life saying and doing things which showed that he clearly had no thoughts of the future whatsoever. He did, however, have one brief moment of glory when he was a young man. He had announced his intention of marrying Anne of Denmark, a pretty princess whom, in the true marital spirit of the times, he had never set eyes upon. Anne dutifully embarked on the hazardous voyage from Denmark for her wedding in Scotland and was almost immediately forced back to the Norwegian coast by a storm.

When it appeared that she would have to spend the winter there James gallantly conceived a plan to sail out to her – an equally hazardous voyage. The King knew that he would have to keep his plan a secret because if they heard about it the Scots people would raise a chorus of justifiable disapproval. He appears to have succeeded; moreover, he made the trip fairly uneventfully and dispensing with all regal formalities married Anne in Norway. Then, after a trip to the Danish court, he returned to Scotland with his bride. Anne, however, exercised little influence over her ungainly husband. She had a passionate temper which often made her behave like a spoilt child. She was says a historian, “utterly ignorant of the art of governing either herself or others, or of calculating the probable consequences of her words and actions.” Queen Elizabeth of England was the last of the children of Henry the Eighth who remained alive, and when she died at Richmond in 1603 James, as the great-grandson of Henry’s sister, Mary Tudor, was the heir to the throne. When the news of Elizabeth’s death reached Scotland James, who was now 37, prepared to go south to claim his new kingdom.

That in itself was a decision that did not lack courage, for England had been fatal to James’s immediate ancestors. So the King resolved to make the trip without his family in order to find out how the people of his new kingdom would behave towards their new king. He was evidently in high hopes of an encouraging welcome for he wrote to his son before he left: “Look upon all Englishmen who shall come to visit you, as your loving subjects, not with ceremoniousness as towards strangers but with heartiness which at this time they deserve.” Then, leaving his wife in tears in Edinburgh High Street, he set off, a tall gangling man with straggling sandy hair and a straggling beard. The welcome England gave him as he crossed the border exceeded everyone’s expectations. In fact, he and his Scottish attendants were so astonished by it that James remarked pithily: “Thae people wul spoil a gude king.” The people’s enthusiasm, however, was perhaps more motivated by self-interest than James’s own firm belief in the Divine Right of Kings to govern as they alone felt. Of course the English Puritans were delighted to see him.

He was sure to be on their side, for the Reformation had been carried out much more strictly in Scotland than in England. And of course the English Catholics were delighted to see him – for was he not the son of the Catholic Mary Queen of Scots? Both parties were doomed to disappointment. For James merely gave his assent to the worship already being practised in England. But at a religious conference at Hampton Court Palace he also gave his assent to the re-translation of the Bible – the Authorised Version that we read today. Neither Puritans nor Catholics were satisfied with the royal handling of their religious affairs. Some of the Puritans eventually decided to emigrate and chose North America as their new home, founding the New England states there and carving their place in history as the Pilgrim Fathers. A small body of Catholics, against whom James began to legislate with high-handed severity, decided upon more drastic action: they resolved that when James and his son Henry, Prince of Wales, arrived to open Parliament in November, 1605, they would blow everyone sky high.

Barrels of gunpowder were hidden in the vaults of Parliament House and a Catholic soldier named, as everyone knows, Guy Fawkes, was hired to do the deed. But when warning was brought from an informer to the King “that Parliament shall receive a terrible blow,” James remembered how his father, Lord Darnley, was murdered in a gunpowder plot in Scotland, and he had the cellars searched and the conspirators arrested, tortured and executed. Alas, James rarely put a foot right after the Gunpowder Plot. Financially he was a poor King who nevertheless loved extravagance and was soon deep in money troubles. He was a hard drinker and was seen drunk in public on at least one occasion. He appointed weak and worthless men like Robert Carr, a squire whom he made Earl of Somerset, to high office, with disastrous consequences.

While the people trumpeted their discontent the King proclaimed his belief in the Divine Right of Kings – “I will govern,” he announced, “according to the common weal*; not according to the common will.” Now, as James and his Queen continued to fritter away money wastefully and as the King’s private conduct and his habit of preferring his favourites to the men who were most fitted to govern began to alienate him from his Parliament, there began that great struggle for power between the King and the Commons that was to last almost until the end of the century. “I am surprised,” James said angrily when he had occasion to dissolve one of his Parliaments, “that my ancestors should have permitted such an institution to come into existence.” His short-sighted successors, in fact, were to view that event even more ruefully. Parliament’s demands were for justice in the law courts, freedom of religious worship, freedom of trade and dismissal of the King’s favourites. No money for the King, they declared, until these wrongs were righted. Parliament was already growing extremely powerful and would have been listened to attentively by a wiser monarch. James instead turned a deaf ear.

When he visited the Midlands one day his pale blue eyes alighted on George Villiers, a young man of extraordinary good looks and undoubted charm. Villiers reminded the King of a portrait of St. Stephen in one of the Italian masterpieces at Whitehall Palace, which explains why he always called this gallant new favourite “Steenie.” He took “Steenie” as his private secretary and very soon he was comparing him in the circle of the royal family to a faithful dog. “My kind Dogge” was the term of address he used in letters to Villiers, and Villiers, in his turn, would sign himself, “Your poor slave and dogge.” To Queen Anne the King wrote: “I am glad that our brother’s horse does please you, and that my dog Steenie does well . . . and when he comes home I will treat him better than any other dog.” Unfortunately this new dog for the moment pleased only his new master and mistress; to the noblemen and Parliament he positively snarled.

James took no heed of the anger of these people; instead he made “Steenie” first a knight, then a Viscount, then an Earl, next a Marquess; finally he gave him the highest honour in the land – a dukedom, together with all the authority and power of England’s Chief Minister. Villiers in turn showered honours on his own family, all of which James benignly approved, for, said he one day in the presence of the entire Villiers family, “I desire to advance you above all others.” When this kind of lead was being given by the King, bribery and corruption became understandingly rife in high places. Against this background James was sorting out his family problems. On the anniversary of the Gunpowder Plot his eldest son Henry, Prince of Wales, died, and his second son Charles became his heir. His beautiful daughter Elizabeth, from whom the present Royal Family is descended, had married the Elector-Palatine, newly chosen King of Bohemia, and to help his son-in-law in his troubles James tried to enlist the aid of Spain.

The way to do this, he thought, was to arrange a marriage between his son Charles and the Infanta Maria of Spain and so, on a mission half of business and half of pleasure, Charles set out to Spain accompanied by the King’s faithful “Steenie.” They went, surprisingly, not as Prince and nobleman, but as two common travellers, and once the Spanish had got over this peculiarity they were well received. “Steenie,” however, succeeded in making himself as thoroughly unpopular in Spain as he had made himself in England. Charles returned home with him at the end of eight months with no match made; the sum result of their achievements was that Villiers felt that he had been so insulted (whereas the reverse was true) that he was determined to lead England into a war against Spain. James was not at all put out by his favourite’s failure. Now old and doddery, he referred to himself in Villiers’s presence as “your old dade.” Worse still for England, Prince Charles had fallen victim to the easy charm of Villiers, a fact that the rest of the court noticed with increasing anger and alarm.

Having brought the heir to the throne under his magic spell Villiers grew tired of his “dear old dade.” While the King languished into senility Villiers continued his disastrous career of ruining England’s foreign policy, and when the old King died early in 1625 he left to his son Charles a seething kingdom and a heritage of danger. * “Weal” is an old English word meaning happiness, or well-being. King James I, 'the Wisest Fool in Christendom' King James I, 'the Wisest Fool in Christendom' TOOLBOX Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, May 9, 2007 The colony that bore his name was of no great import to him, and he was disgusted by the crop that would prove to be its economic foundation. He was more interested in the flying squirrels sent from Virginia as zoological curiosities than the consequences of English settlement of the New World. Yet King James I of England, for whom Jamestown and the James River were named, approved the creation of the colony and kept it alive despite worries that its presence might provoke war with Spain. Jamestown sprang from the spirit of exploration established by the king's predecessor, Queen Elizabeth I.

The Age of Elizabeth had seen English ships sent around the world and several attempts to establish a colony in North America, none successful. James had assumed the throne of Scotland in 1567 when his mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, was forced to abdicate, and he became king of England after his cousin Elizabeth died in 1603. James lacked Elizabeth's boldness; his primary concern was to avoid war with Spain, Europe's greatest power, with which he made a quick peace. But James refused to renounce any English claim to North America despite Spain's domination of the New World. In 1606, he granted a charter to the Virginia Company to establish a colony in North America. When the Spanish ambassador demanded that he put an end to Jamestown, the king demurred. Erudite yet lacking in vision, he was famously dubbed "the wisest fool in Christendom." James also had a most unregal bearing. "A lifetime of gluttony and immoderate drinking had much reshaped his head and body," historian David Price wrote in his history of Jamestown.

Pocahontas, introduced to James in 1617 during her visit to London, could scarcely believe he was king. Despite his habits, James was repulsed by smoking, describing it as a "custome Lothsome to the eye, hateful the Nose, harmfull to the braine, [and] dangerous to the Lungs." Still, James did not intercede as Pocahontas's husband, John Rolfe, crossed native Virginia tobacco with seeds from the West Indies to create a lucrative crop for Jamestown. "When it really came down to it, he was quite willing to take the revenue," scholar James Horn said. "He was a pragmatist." © 2007 The Washington Post Company James I Was Described as "The Wisest Fool in Christendom" and His Son Charles as "An Inept King". to What Extent Can the Early Stuarts 1603 to 1629 Be Please sign up to read full document. Text Preview This question is looking at trying to understand who and what factors led to the 11 years personal rule by Charles I.

The relationship breakdown between Crown and Parliament began in 1603 with James I and ended in 1629 when Parliament was dissolved. To fully understand the causes of the breakdown we need to look what inherited problems James had to face. Elizabeth had created a debt of £400,000 which was passed onto James, so already he faced severe financial problems. On top of this was the 16th century price rise, which had created an inflation of 400%. This created the Canker of want' (James) where income was less than expenditure. Inflation had seriously decreased the value of subsidies granted by parliament from £140,000 in 1500 to £72,500 in 1600. James was not happy with the greatness of my debt and the smallest of my means'. Fixed rents and poor management of his feudal dues created even more problems for James; he could no longer Live of his own' and had to rely on money from parliament. As Russell said  The Stuarts inherited a financial system that was already at the point of breakdown'. The character and qualities of James did not help the relationship.

James was not kingly in appearance. His oversized tongue made speaking difficult and his small size and rapier proof double he wore gave him a cowardly look about him. But worse of all was his Scottish heritage. He was seen as a foreigner from a land despised by Englishmen as England was still technically at war with Spain. James wanted to unify England and Scotland and saw himself as a peacemaker, which was not very well recognised after the reign of the ruthless Queen Elizabeth. James did not take very naturally to the new ways of English parliament, as in Scotland he was used to sitting in on parliamentary debates and having control parliament. James also placed himself in a bad position for having Scottish favourites such as Lord Hay, and unwisely excluded his English advisors making him very unpopular. He was not a traveller like his predecessor Elizabeth who spent time progressing around the country, which resulted in him not being liked as much as Good Queen Bess'. In 1605 the gunpowder plot panicked him into fear of being assassinated and rapier proof doublet to bed which did not give him a good name.

We can not really blame James for his character but we can see already the relationship between James and Parliament was unstable; they did not trust him and believed he was bringing Scotsmen on the make'; it was a foolish failure of patronage Charles, like his father, had a stubborn belief in divine right, but unlike his father he tried to put it into practice. He saw Parliaments privileges' as granted by the crown, but Parliament believed they were granted by tradition and Magna Carta. This was inevitably going to cause friction between crown and parliament as they faced the challenge of a new century. The times were changing' (Reece) and Charles had to manage the balance of the constitution'. Charles also took criticism badly and saw it as treachery, he couldn't even cope with constructive criticism. Also he was a poor communicator, yet another part of his character like his father. He found it very had to speak in Parliament and his speeches were often short and critical They are to be or not to be as I see fit'. This added to the lack of communication between crown and Parliament.

Charles only had a small circle of favourites such as Buckingham, and Buckingham's failures, such as the Spanish Match, reflected badly on the King. Already the characters of both kings were going to cause some friction and inept leadership, and was therefore the fault of the kings. James extravagance was to cause anger in parliament and financial problems. His spending on clothes grew from £8,000 to £37,000 a year. Through his reckless spending James doubled his debts in three years from the £400,000 he had inherited from Elizabeth to £816,000. James... Please sign up to read full document. YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL King James I - Children's British History Encyclopedia Children's British History Encyclopedia Stuarts ‎ > ‎ King James I When Queen Elizabeth I died without any children, her closest relative - King James VI of Scotland (great-great-grandson of Henry VII) - therefore became the heir to the throne. He was crowned King James I of England on 25th July 1603 at Westminster Abbey and this began a period of reign by the House of Stuart.

Some English people didn't like the idea because they thought of him as a foreigner and didn't understand him but others were pleased to have a king in charge after many years of having a woman on the throne. He was the first monarch to rule both countries and the first to call himself 'King of Great Britain'. A new flag representing this royal union between England and Scotland was introduced on 12th April 1606 - it joined together the red St. George's Cross of England on a white background with the white St. Andrew's Cross of Scotland on a blue background and was known simply as 'the British flag' or 'the flag of Britain' at the time. James was an Anglican and worshiped the Church of England. He believed that people should be able to read the Bible for themselves and he ordered a new English translation (it was currently in a mixture of: Greek, Hebrew and Latin). It became known as the Authorised King James Version and could be found in every church in England. Produced by 47 scholars, it was first published in 1611 and is still used all over the world today. He led such an extravagant lifestyle that he soon became unpopular with both Parliament and the people.

Some called him 'The wisest fool in Christendom', meaning that although he was clever, he had no common sense. He died on 27th March 1625 at Theobald's Park, Hertforshire (aged 58) and was buried at Westminster Abbey. He left the country badly in dept. The wisest fool | The Economist The wisest fool Readers are invited to nominate the wisest fool of the past 50 years Dec 16th 2004 Tweet IT IS not quite clear whether it was Henry IV of France or—more likely—his chief minister, the Duc de Sully, who described James I (of England, VI of Scotland) as “the wisest fool in Christendom”. It is not even clear what prompted the coining of the epithet, though James (above) was certainly a mixture of opposites of every kind.

In the words of Sir Walter Scott, He was deeply learned, without possessing useful knowledge; sagacious in many individual cases, without having real wisdom...He was fond of his dignity, while he was perpetually degrading it by undue familiarity; capable of much public labour, yet often neglecting it for the meanest amusement; a wit, though a pedant; and a scholar, though fond of the conversation of the ignorant and uneducated...He was laborious in trifles, and a trifler where serious labour was required; devout in his sentiments, and yet too often profane in his language... In short, he was a fool. Yet he was also wise. That made him a much rarer bird than the foolish brainbox—the egg-head who, as a child, takes every prize for scholastic achievement but cannot be trusted to tie his shoelaces, or cross a road, let alone take charge of anything. Such people are indubitably clever. They are the ones who, later on in life, may work out in their heads every kind of intellectual puzzle and show off every arcane piece of knowledge. They may shine at mental long division and be able to expatiate upon the workings of machines or the writings of scholars.

But of judgment—everyday, practical judgment of men and human affairs—they have none. In this section Reprints It is not difficult to think of such people in public life. Bertrand Russell was certainly one, a brilliant philosopher who could, and did, advocate the pre-emptive bombing of the Soviet Union in the 1940s to prevent it acquiring atomic weapons. Enoch Powell, a British politician, was another. He had been a formidable scholar of ancient Greek, yet advocated immigration policies that were downright foolish, as well as nasty. In politics, at least, intellect alone is never enough. Machiavelli argued that the ability to recognise cleverness in others may be as important to a ruler as to be clever himself. Oliver Wendell Holmes, the great American jurist, was getting at something similar when he spoke, admiringly, of Franklin Roosevelt as a man with “a second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament”. The fifth Marquess of Salisbury was certainly not being complimentary, even to his duller-witted colleagues, when he described his fellow-Tory, Iain Macleod, as “too clever by half”. He meant too liberal, but even so the barb hit a nerve.

And Quinapalus, that all-purpose authority invented by Feste in Shakespeare's “Twelfth Night”, was offering a variation on the theme when he averred, “Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.” Today we are after that rarer oxymoron: the wisest fool. He or she must be fundamentally an idiot, but a shrewd or cunning one. Candidates need not inhabit Christendom, but they must be alive, or have been in the past 50 years. They may come from the world of politics, or academia or business—or perhaps the church, the stage or journalism. Or somewhere else: on the Titanic, one of them was seen heading for the bar when everyone else was taking to the boats. Evolution suggests that the man or woman we seek, though unusual, is more common than you may suppose: were it otherwise, the breed would have disappeared. Nominate your contender, explaining why he or she deserves the title in no more than 100 words, to reach us by January 17th.

The three best entries will be published in our issue of January 29th, libel laws permitting, and will receive a copy of the King James Bible, in memory of the first wisest fool. Entries, please, to Competition, The Economist, 25 St James's Street, London SW1A 1HG, or by e-mail to competition@economist.com .

Next in The world this week X Next in The world this week X Next in Middle East and Africa X Next in Middle East and Africa X Next in Middle East and Africa X Next in Middle East and Africa X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Finance and economics X Next in Science and technology X Next in Science and technology X Next in Science and technology X Next in Books and arts X Next in Books and arts X Next in Books and arts X Next in Books and arts X Next in Books and arts X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X Next in Economic and financial indicators X A short history of James VI of Scotland James VI & I of Scotland A BRIEF BIOGRAPHY AND TIMELINE ON THE LIFE OF MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS SON, (Whose titles were: JAMES VI, KING OF SCOTLAND & JAMES I, KING OF EN

GLAND) (“the wisest fool in Christendom” so-called by Henry the Fourth of France.) BIRTH At Stirling Castle, between the hours of 9 o’clock and 10 o’clock in the morning of June 19, 1566, Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to her son James.

With James in her arms she presented him to Darnley with these words: “My Lord, here I protest to God, and as I shall answer to Him at the great day of judgment, this is your son, and no other man’s son; and I am desirous that all here, both ladies and others, bear witness, for he is so much your own son that I fear it may be the worse for him hereafter.” To William Standon, one of her soldiers, she said “this is the prince whom I hope shall first unite the two kingdoms of England and Scotland.” A wish that came true. With this speech she had obviously given up her hope to succeed to the throne of her great grandfather, Henry VII. As soon as James was born, Melville (the Queen’s secretary) was dispatched to England to inform Elizabeth of the birth. Melville was also instructed to ask Elizabeth to become Godmother. Melville arrived at Greenwich just as Elizabeth was giving a ball.

When Cecil, Elizabeth’s Secretary of State, and Melville gave the news of the birth to Elizabeth, she ” ‘was filled with sudden melancholy … Interrupting the dance, she sank dejectedly into an armchair, and said to the ladies who surrounded her, that the Queen of Scots was mother of a fair son, while she was but a barren stock.’ ” She did accept the invitation to become James Godmother but did not attend the baptism in the royal chapel at Stirling Castle. Instead sent the Countess of Argyle to represent her at the ceremony. Also in attendance at the baptism were the representatives of the French king and the Duke of Savoy who were the Godfathers. Notably absent from this auspicious occasion was Darnley even although he was present in the castle at the time. YOUTH In June of 1567, the Protestant lords rebelled. They had become increasingly unhappy with Mary (James’ mother) after her marriage to Bothwell. They arrested and imprisoned Mary in Lochleven Castle where she was forced to abdicate the throne of Scotland. James, was only a year old when he became James VI, King of Scotland.

Because of his young age a regent was appointed to act as head of state. In fact, during his minority a succession of regents were chosen to rule in his stead. The first regent was Mary’s half brother, James Stuart, Earl of Moray, Upon the Earl’s death in 1570, Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox, who was James grandfather, became the second regent. His regency didn’t last very long, as he died in 1571. The third regent was James’s guardian, John Erskine, the first Earl of Mar whose regency also didn’t last long, he died in 1572. The fourth and last of the regents was the very powerful James Douglas, Earl of Morton. In spite of his mother’s Catholic faith, James was brought up in the Protestant religion. He was educated by men who had empathy for the Presbyterian church. His marriage to Anne of Denmark (a protestant country) no doubt pleased his Protestant subjects. LITERARY ACHIEVEMENTS James was considered to be an intellectual and did write several books. An interesting book on witchcraft came about after his return from Krondborg where his marriage to Anne took place.

This book was the result of his attendance at the North Berwick Witch Trial. Apparently, several people were accused of using the black arts to create a storm hoping that it would sink the ship carrying James and Anne back to Scotland. He became quite troubled about this threat from witchcraft and wrote his book on demonology. As a result, hundreds of women were put to death for supposedly being witches. “A custom loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs, and in the black, stinking fume thereof, nearest resembling the horrible Stygian smoke of the the pit that is bottomless.” James wrote these words in his publication “A Counterblaste to Tobacco (1604).” Without a doubt, James did not like smoking and made it quite plain what he thought about the “loathsome” habit! Another interesting writing was The True Law of Free Monarchies in which he states that “the sovereign succeeds to his kingdom by right from God.” He believed that subjects owe absolute obedience, and that his rights as sovereign could not be attacked nor limited. Though he believed in the divine right of kings his Parliament most definitely did not.

He authorized a translation of the bible which is now known as the King James Version. MARRIAGE James married Anne Oldenburg of Denmark on 23 November, 1589. Anne was the daughter of Frederick II, King of Denmark and Sophia von Mecklenburg-Gustrow. It is said that Anne and James were at first quite close but after several years of marriage they drifted apart. They had quite a large family, eight children in all, of which only three survived. In fact, after the death of their daugher Sophia, Anne and James lived apart. Anne, eventually converted to Catholicism. TWO KINGDOMS UNITED On 25 July, 1603, in Westminster Abbey, James and Anne were crowned. The two kingdoms were now united under one crown. However, they were in fact, two separate kingdoms each with their own legislatures and own administrative bodies. Being under one crown, they could not go to war with each other, they could not take opposing sides in foreign wars. Nor could they make any hostile agreements. James misunderstood the differing powers of the two parliaments and conflicts arose especially in the areas of taxation and religion. There were also diametrically opposite opinions on Spain.

England adamantly believed Spain to be its enemy and, therefore, a country to be defeated. On the other hand, James believed in resolving differences with Spain. A list of troubles for James included: The anger of Roman Catholics, resulting in plots to remove the King. One such plot was the Gunpowder Plot another was the Bye Plot. A Catholic uprising in 1588, and a conspiracy in 1600 led by John Ruthven, Earl of Gowrie. His plan for free trade between Scotland and England was denied. His selling of honors and titles to shore up the debt-ridden treasury. His dissolution of the second Parliament called the Addled Parliament whose purpose was to obtain new taxes. Ultimately, this Parliament failed to pass any legislation and failed to impose taxes. After the dissolution he ruled for seven years without a parliament. Arranging the marriage of his eldest son to the daughter of the King of Spain hoping for an alliance with Spain. The marriage greatly angered the populace. His execution of the well-liked, and admired Sir Walter Raleigh further hurt his popularity. The Five Articles of Perth did not endear him either as they were interpreted as being too Catholic and Anglican-like therefore a threat to Scottish Presbyterians.

(The Five Articles of Perth: (1) kneeling during communion, (2) private baptism, (3) private communion for the sick or infirm, (4) confirmation by a Bishop and (5) the observance of Holy Days.) REIGN R. S. Raitt and J.S. Parrott wrote: “The reign of James the First of England and Sixth of Scotland, ‘the wisest fool in Christendom’…, was a complete failure, and a time of gathering storm which burst upon the country in the reign of his son. His ideas of kingship and prerogative turned Parliament against him, and began the long duel between king and people which resulted in the execution of Charles the First. Parliament defended its privileges; secured the right to discuss all affairs of state; overthrew monopolies; and by the impeachment of Bacon and others made good the principle that ministers of the king ought to be held responsible for their acts. James’ hatred of extreme parties caused him to persecute the Puritans and Roman Catholics, and set them against him. His foreign policy was also a failure.

In his desire for peace and a Spanish alliance he sacrificed Raleigh, and refused to help his Protestant son-in-law in Germany, greatly to the indignation of the English people. Finally, however, he declared war with Spain, and married his son to a French Roman Catholic princess. He left his people angry and defiant, and only a very tactful conciliatory successor could have avoided conflict.” (Fingerposts, 1909) THE COURT AND AN OPINION OF JAMES’ CHARACTER It is said that his wife Anne was the one who brought art and culture to the court of King James. James had his court favorites, and considering he was an intelligent person, he strangely relied on these people for advice on government issues even though their qualifications were questionable. These favorites apparently had lots of personal charm but not much in the way of talent or intelligence. In 1584, James was visited by Fontenay, his mother Mary’s french emmissary (Labanoff, vi, 80). Fontenay had the following to say regarding the young James’ character and traits: “I have been well received by the king, who has treated me better in reality than in appearance.

He give me much credit, but does not show me much kindness. Since the day of my arrival he has ordered me to live in his house along with the earls and lords, and that I shall have access to him in his cabinet just as the others have… . To tell you truly what I think of him – I consider him the first prince in the world for his age. … . He apprehends and conceives quickly, he judges ripely and with reason, and he retains much and for a long time. In questioning he is quick and piercing, and solid in his answers. … He is learned in many languages, sciences, and affairs of state. more so than probably anyone in his realm. In a word he has a miraculous wit, and moreover is full of noble glory and a good opinion of himself. Having been brought up in the midst of constant fears, he is timid and will not venture to contradict the great lords; yet he wishes to be thought brave. He hates dancing and music in general and especially all the mincing affectations of the court … . From want of proper instruction his manners are boorish and very rough, as well in his way of speaking, eating.

dress, amusements and conversation, even in the company of women. He is never at rest in one place but takes a singular pleasure in walking; but his gait is very ungainly and his step is wandering and unsteady, even in a room. His voice is thick and very deep as he speaks. … He is weak of body … But to sum up, he is an old young man. … He misunderstands the real extent of his poverty and weakness; he boasts too much of himself and he despises other princes. In the second place, he disregards the wishes of his subjects; and lastly, he is too idle and careless in business and too much addicted to his own pleasures, chiefly hunting. … He told me that he really gave greater attention to business than he seemed to do for he could get through more work in one hour than others could in a day. … DEATH James ruled Scotland as James VI from 24th July 1567; James ruled in England and Ireland as James 1st from 24th March, 1603.

He died 27th March, 1625 at Theobalds House, and his remains lie in the Henry VII Lady Chapel in Westminster Abbey. GENEALOGY CHART If you have Acrobat Reader you can click here for a genealogy chart of the descendants of Henry VII. (Be sure to use the zoom-in tool to make the chart readable. Also, please click on the back button to get back to this page.) The chart shows the ancestral relationship of James’ parents through Margaret Tudor’s marriage to James IV of Scotland, and her second marriage to Archibald Douglas. You will see that the marriage to James IV produced Margaret Tudor’s granddaughter Mary Queen of Scots, and her marriage to Archibald Douglas produced Margaret Tudor’s grandson, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. TIMELINE OF IMPORTANT EVENTS FOR JAMES VI & I (1566-1625) YEAR

Question: Which king of England was called "the wisest fool in Christendom"?
Answer: James I