The Ascension of James VI & I with Steven Veerapen

   The ascension of James VI & I with Steven Veerapen

Hello Steven, thank you so much for agreeing to do an interview with me!

Firstly, please tell us a little bit about yourself.

Hi Jessica,
Thanks for hosting me! It’s a pleasure to talk about James VI and I. I’ve recently finished a biography of him, “The Wisest Fool: The Lavish Life of James VI and I”, so this is very timely. Beyond that, I’m a novelist (with a new series of crime novels starring Anthony Blanke, fictional son of John Blanke, set in the reign of Henry VIII), and I teach English and Creative Writing at the University of Strathclyde. I’ve been working on the Tudors and Stuarts for a few years now, and have written novels set in the reigns of Elizabeth and James, and nonfiction studies of Elizabeth and Essex and Mary Queen of Scots and her brother Moray. I’m hoping I don’t get bored of the early modern period – thankfully no signs of that yet!

Where did your interest in 16th-century history begin? 

It definitely began in childhood. I always loved history, from Ancient Egypt to the Tudors to the Victorians and Edwardians. I used to enjoy the Horrible Histories books and my favourite was “The Terrible Tudors”. TV shows and movies set in the sixteenth century played a role too. If only there were a drama series covering James’s life story…!

Could you tell us a bit of a background to James and who he was?

James was the only son of the ill-fated Mary Queen of Scots and her second husband, Lord

Darnley. Because his mother was deposed, fled to England for support, and was imprisoned, he 

never really knew her. He was installed as king as an infant and the country was governed by a 

succession of regents, whilst James was given a classical education, varying levels of 

deference, little love, and endless political turmoil. He developed into an affable but needy man, 

given to obsessions and usually convinced that he was in the right. Though the term didn’t 

exist, he was bisexual with a romantic preference for men, but he wouldn’t have seen his interest 

in male relationships as something that set him apart from other men of his era; his kingship did 

that, and throughout his life kingship would provide his identity.

Do you think James was happy to inherit the English throne from Elizabeth I?

Definitely! James had been scheming for his English succession rights for decades. When he 

received word that Elizabeth was dead and he was now king of England and Ireland as well as 

Scotland, he claimed that he would be exchanging an ‘unruly colt’ for a ‘towardly riding 

horse’ (in other words, he would be moving from Scotland, which he had fought long and hard to 

govern in the autocratic way he believed was his right, and England, which he mistakenly 

believed was entirely settled, governable, and eager only for continuity).

Why did Elizabeth want James to inherit the throne? Instead of her Grey relatives?

That’s a good question. We have no definitive evidence that Elizabeth wanted James to inherit 

over anyone else. She certainly appeared more amenable to the Stuart succession than that of

her Grey cousins – but that was only when it suited her, and probably because the Greys were in

her power (and she could thus degrade them at will when she wished to) whereas James was 

an independent sovereign. But she was no fool. She knew James would inherit even if she

refused to ever acknowledge it – and it was probably better, from her perspective, that an 

experienced king took the reins. However, I think the fact of dying and letting anyone take her 

place would have been a huge disappointment to Elizabeth.

Do you have your theories about why Elizabeth was so reluctant to name her heir?

It started out as a political strategy; as long as she kept her options open and kept everyone guessing, no faction would build around the acknowledged heir (a fact she acknowledged herself in her famous quote about the fickle English preferring the rising to the setting sun). This sound strategy became, however, something of a mania. Even when it became clear she would never marry and could no longer bear children, she refused to let it go. She was lucky she had a skilful secretary, Robert Cecil, who was willing to go behind her back and arrange things. Her refusal to name an heir right up until her death could have resulted in civil war and unrest if Cecil and his fellows – Lord Henry Howard, for example – hadn’t ignored her cavalier attitude to the succession and organised matters secretly. James succeeded smoothly despite Elizabeth’s myopia, not because of her.

When Elizabeth died, who came to tell James he was now king?

James was first notified by Robert Carey, who stole north with the news before the gates of

Richmond Palace (where Elizabeth died) could be locked. He made the journey in record time, 

beating the official delegation from the Great Council – and this despite a fall from his horse 

leaving him bloody. He hoped for high rewards for this and, despite the initial promise, he would

be disappointed.

What were the funeral proceedings for Elizabeth? And who oversaw them?

Cecil arranged for Elizabeth to be embalmed (reportedly against her wishes) and afterwards, she was transferred to Whitehall. From there, a grand funeral procession took her, in a purple-draped coffin, in a hearse topped with an effigy dressed in her parliamentary robes, through the streets to Westminster Abbey. There, she was buried in the Lady Chapel. The chief mourner was the Lady Marquis of Northampton. James would later pay to have a grand monument built for her (though not as grand as the one he would, still later, have for his mother). Interestingly, however, when his own wife, Anna, died, he would insist that three times as much was lavished on her funeral than had been spent on Elizabeth’s.

Where did Elizabeth lie in state after her death?

Elizabeth lay in state for several days at Richmond following her embalming. Interestingly, Lady Southwell would claim that a great crack tore through her coffin, signifying that the body within had burst. The same tale had also been recounted about Henry VIII, however, which should give us reason to doubt its veracity (as should the fact that her coffin, when rediscovered, bore no signs of anything gruesome or untoward having disturbed it).

Who came with James to England?

James came to England with a small body of advisers. He did not travel with his wife and children; they stayed behind in Scotland for some weeks. The official reason was that Queen Anna could not take up her role whilst Elizabeth’s funeral was underway, especially given she was pregnant (an excuse given the lie by the instructions he left that he should follow her shortly enough). The likelier reason is that James was not entirely sure what reception he’d get and so didn’t want to risk bringing the whole royal family into a country which until recently had been wary of him.

Were the English privy councillors happy to have a Scottish King on their throne?

Yes, on the whole. The Privy Council officially ceased to exist when Elizabeth died but it was hastily reconstituted as the Great Council until James could confirm its make-up (which he did on the journey south). Individual politicians, however, would show themselves unhappy – and thus would be born the Main and Bye (or By) Plots, which aimed to prevent the new king and queen from being crowned and place James’s cousin Arabella on the throne.

How did Scotland feel about the fact they would now have an absent king?

James gave a valedictory speech promising to return to Scotland every three years (a promise

he broke, as he returned only once, in 1617). There were, however, scattered troubles when he

left, not helped by Queen Anna’s feud with Prince Henry’s keeper, the Earl of Mar, coming 

to a head. James was forced to intercede from England, giving Henry into the custody of his 

mother (something she’d battled with him over for years), and peace was restored. The queen

and prince (along with Princess Elizabeth) reunited and the storms died down. James had 

governed well in his last years in Scotland – well enough that there were no great noble

uprisings trying to take power when he left.

Do we know if there were any riots against the ascension of James?

There weren’t in England (only those scattered troubles in Scotland). On the whole, the English

people had been worried about what might happen when Elizabeth died. That a new king was 

swiftly proclaimed was probably a relief to the multitude, who didn’t have to worry about the civil 

war and risks to life, limb, or property. 

 Did James take any immediate dislikings to English courtiers?

He did indeed – and to one of the most famous of them. He loathed Sir Walter Raleigh, whom he’d long been poisoned against. Raleigh found himself out of favour and then implicated in the Spanish-backed plotting to keep James off the throne. For this, he would lose his offices and be tried at Winchester in the opening months of the reign. He was found guilty and sentenced to death, though in the event he would be kept in the Tower. Over a decade later, he would be released after promising to secure gold from the Orinoco. He failed, and his mission saw trouble with the Spanish (with whom James had long made peace). His old death sentence would at last be carried out and he went to the block in 1618.

What Scottish customs did James and his royal family bring to England?

In terms of court life, James brought a very Scottish custom to England – and one that the 

English would refuse to understand. Scottish subjects of suitable rank had traditionally been 

given high levels of access to their king, up to and including access to the bedchamber (indeed, 

Mary Queen of Scots had held audiences in her bedroom). In England, the bedchamber was a 

sacrosanct space (and it had been particularly so for decades when the sovereign had been 

female) open only to the favoured few. As James was still king of Scotland, he thus had to keep 

his bedroom door open to a significant number of high-ranking and favoured Scots. Yet many 

English subjects found it closed. The English, not understanding (or caring) that James was 

required to wear two crowns, would thus perennially complain about Scots being privileged 

over themselves in terms of royal access; one courtier moaned that Scotsmen stood ‘like 

mountains betwixt the beams of his Grace and us’. The English appear to have thought that their 

imported king was a king of England and thus subject to English customs and traditions only.

Did James find any of the English customs strange?

Yes – James was particularly bemused by the English practice of royalty touching commoners as a means of curing ‘the king’s evil’ (scrofula). He found the practice as superstitious and silly as it was disgusting. In the years to come, he would often delegate it to his archbishops of Canterbury. But his attitude might well explain the curious discussion about ‘the king’s evil’ in “Macbeth”!

Did James make any immediate changes to English law when he became king?

James’s main aim in coming to the English throne was to stress continuity. He was a great fan of the English Common Law – indeed, he wanted to extend it to Scotland (a goal he never achieved, and which in fact has never happened). There is a much-told story of how he had a thief summarily hanged on his journey south, as he didn’t understand the limits of his authority, but few made anything of it at the time. Later, he would butt heads with parliament, which he claimed was only a conciliar body, but despite such petulant acts as ripping out pages of the record when parliament tried to enact something of which he disapproved, he would always manage to avert or defuse major conflicts. Again, Shakespeare seems to have had his finger on the pulse; 1604’s “Measure for Measure” betrays a lot of anxiety about whether kings should be making laws, playing with laws, or obeying laws!

At the time of his ascension, who was his wife? And did he have any children?

James married Anna of Denmark in 1589, and she produced a bevvy of children (though only

three, Henry, Charles, and Elizabeth, would survive infancy). He was certainly not an ‘heir and a 

spare’ man, and the marriage attained an enduring level of affection (which it never lost). He is 

reported to have strayed from Anna only once in Scotland, with one Mistress Anne Murray; in 

England, his attraction to men returned to the fore and he began lavishing attention on a 

succession of beaus. This did not appear to impact his marriage or sex life with his queen, 

whose last child would be born (and sadly die) in 1606. Thereafter, he fell in love first with the 

arrogant Robert Carr (whom Anna hated) and then the attractive George Villiers. With Villiers, 

later Duke of Buckingham, James achieved a curious harmony: king, queen, and royal lover 

were largely friendly. When Anna died in 1619, James came to depend on Buckingham 

desperately.

Was James a protestant, and did he want to keep the religion of England protestant too?

James was Protestant, though he and Anna would both be plagued by rumours that they heard

secret masses. She was certainly sympathetic to Catholicism (which was useful to James 

politically), but the king was and would remain a moderate Calvinist for whom extremes (whether 

Jesuit or Puritanical) were anathema.

How did the common people feel about their new monarch?

On his accession and for several years afterwards, James was viewed with enthusiasm and

hope: here was the male ruler so prized in the period, and in the form of a family man with heirs 

to succeed him. However, thanks to his success in keeping the peace with foreign powers, he 

never had an ‘Armada moment’ and so never attained the mythological status of Elizabeth, and 

he was undoubtedly spendthrift and extravagant (a fact which he apologised for but did nothing 

to change). Further, he often held himself distant from his people – and he hated London. When 

religious conflict broke out in Europe, many in England clamoured for war, and James 

remained dedicated to keeping the peace. This meant that his legacy – of having kept England 

stable and peaceful – is laudable to us; many in his day, however, wanted a Protestant 

warmonger who would revitalise the Armada spirit (forgetting that Elizabeth had been only 

reluctantly drawn into war herself). He was thus subject to far more lampoons, satires, and 

pasquinades than any previous monarch.

Was James popular in Scotland as a king?

That’s another great question – and it would depend on who you asked. He was frequently 

unpopular with the Kirk (Scotland’s church), or at least with its more Presbyterian-minded clergy 

and members, for whom royals were a source of suspicion (‘devil’s bairns’, according to one 

preacher). They looked askance at his friendships with Catholic magnates (and doubly so at his 

queen’s, to say nothing of her penchant for dancing and balling). Yet he survived and thrived, 

which he couldn’t have done if he hadn’t the skill to win over sufficient people and strengthen the 

Crown (which had fallen in prestige thanks to the many minorities, including his own, it had 

faced), particularly against noble threats. In Scotland, James and Anna did everything that was 

asked of them in terms of monarchy: they produced heirs and they kept the country stable, 

despite religious figures frequently snapping at their heels. Both were survivors.

What did James say for his first public speech as King of England?

James spoke to parliament in March 1604, and in his first speech, he thanked England for the reception he’d been given. It would never, he said, be ‘blotted out of my mind, how, at my first entry into this kingdom, the people of all sorts rid, and ran, nay, rather flew, to meet me, their eyes flaming nothing but sparkles of affection’. He was keen, though, to emphasise his own importance, drawing attention to ‘the blessings which God hath in my person bestowed upon you all’. He started as he meant to go on – promoting peace and his supreme status. 

Did James have hopes of uniting England and Scotland under one monarch?

James had dreamt of this for decades – he knew it, according to the laws of primogeniture, to be his birthright. However, he wanted more than a personal union; he wanted and expected full political integration of Scotland and England, with the names of both being replaced by ‘Great Britain’ (of which he believed himself emperor), and the Borders becoming the ‘Middle Shires’. He would not get his wish. Both Scotland and England would resist full political incorporation, despite his concerted efforts and the efforts of the commission he set up. Even in 1707, when Scotland and England were merged politically into the Kingdom of Great Britain, James’s wishes would not be met: he wanted not only the names of the old kingdoms to be, essentially, extinguished but for one law – English Common Law – to cover the whole kingdom (which was to be ruled in perpetuity by his dynasty).

To finish, what is your favourite historical fact?

About James, my favourite fact is either that he seemed to like the word ‘sparkles’, or that he had a pet armadillo (with its own keeper!). Away from James and the period, it tickles me that the Titanic had a room reserved for washing potatoes.

Thank you so much for the interesting conversation Steven, I've had a blast!

Until next time, ScandalousTudor 🌹