Scotland's HistoryDebatesJames VI's Legacy
The Scotland's History online debates are now closed.
We would like to thank everyone who contributed over the two years that they ran and made the debates lively, informative and engaging.
On the 24th March 1603 James VI of Scotland was proclaimed King of England. James only ever returned to Scotland once thereafter, boasting that he ruled Scotland with a pen. Did Scotland suffer with an absent king or learn that, perhaps, it didn't need one?
James VI of Scotland succeeds after the death of Elizabeth to become James I, King of England.
From A history of Scotland: Project Britain.
James survives
From A history of Scotland: Project Britain
Don't know if this is relevant but James the IV was called James the I of Britain, our current queen is Elisabeth II of Britain, can anyone tell me who Elisabeth I of Britain was (good Queen Bess was I of England)?
the campbells were pro wallace and bruce wallace couldnt have done it alone he needed the campbells above all
I am a Morton and a direct decendent to James The Black Douglas. I am proud to be a Scot, and even prouder of the fact that my ancestor fought with King Robert theBruce and William Wallace. It is so saddening to me when all I hear is The Stewarts. On every bit of tourist goodies, all you see is the Royal Stewart tartan, and yes, you are all right about the Stewart dynasty, it pervades our every day life from the English parliament. SUCH A PARCEL OF ROGUES IN A NATION!!
I would like to blow this wide open by just saying that the present royal mafia are descended from the Stewarts. I dont think they are any different.We should have got rid of the whole bloody lot of them,possibly in the fashion of the French or Russians. They are all in it for their own benefit,and Scotland suffers being ruled by the pen of Westminister,while being treated as a holiday home for the royals.
Guido Fawkes was unlucky, and the Gunpowder Plot was only part of a larger plot to massacre all the Scots on the make in London. Perhaps if it had been successful, we'd still be an independent country.
What about some more modern history here. For example, would the socialist John McLean have made a good Prime Minister? Answers on a postcard please, to Gordon Brown at the usual address.
Hi Brian,
I like your list of villans. With Jimmy the Sixth, I find it amusing to note that the English bitterly resented what they saw as a Scottish takeover, and claimed Jimmy favoured his own countrymen. History shows he was a shrewd operator and treated everyone even handedly. Still it was bad bad bad for our nation. Absentee landlords always are.
In reply to Stu - Durham, I do not think the Campbell dynasty of the 17th
- BBC Scotland Moderator-
Hi Robert, for some reason this message keeps coming through cropped. Apologies for this - pretty certain the fault is at our end. If you email your post to [email protected] I'll get the post up on the site. Once again, apologies for this.
Hi Stu, then there's Charles.E. STEWART, who ultimately helped accelerate the clearing of High Sco, the persecution & destruction of the true Scots language & culture originally started by his STEWART forebears. Parasitical reprobate. Thank you ever so much Bonnie Prince for dressing up as a WOMAN and runnin away with Flora MacDonald. Haha! I know a good retreat's said to be better than a bad stand but that's just embarrasing.
Was Charles II the wee guy that lost his head? Musta been even wee'er after that.
Hi Brian I think the other Stuart I'd have to add to the list would be Charles II. 1650, came to Scotland, took the Covenant, supported Argylle, left his father's biggest supporter, Montrose, in the lurch, re-embroiled the Scots in the Civil war, steered them to massive disasters at Dunbar and Worcester, sold
- BBC Scotland Moderator -
Hi Stu, apologies -looks like the tail end of your message has been cropped. I'll post again in full if you re-send.
Part 2.
a king at a time when we most needed one. What sort of a boast was that - I can rule Scotland with a pen? He wasn't long in siding with Eng's parliament either & tying the hands of ours by the use of his mighty pen. Echoes of the past are reverberating now. Wonder if he was a Fifer too?
Anyway & last but not least, 3) Queen Anne STEWART. For her duplicious deeds which engineered the events of May 1st 1707. Second stab at the heart of Scotland by a Stewart leader. God willing there won't be a third!
Hi Tom, I've tried to find something that was positive for Scotland and "Scots" out of James the Sixth's decision to jump the dyke....? Nope it's still all bad! He was a rat! If there are 3 people I "hate" throughout our history it's 1) Sir John STEWART. For selling out William Wallace. 2) King James STEWART (VI). For further weakening the country with his continued emaciation & persecution of the backbone of the country (Gaels) & the border clans, then jumping the dyke & leaving us without... PTO>>
Hi, Stu i do not think the Campbell dynasty of the 17th & 18th century did their clan any favours with the rest of the highland clans with their involvement in "the Glencoe Business" from orders from King William,they were the political opportunist's of that time & with their involvement at Culloden& then as the agents of the Hanovarian government in Scotland who publicly displayed there allegiance to the crown, with there show trial at Inveraray of the innocent Seumas ' a ' Ghlinne ( James of the glens ) who was found guilty of the murder of Colin Campbell of Glenure ( the red fox ) & hanged at Ballachulish on Wed. 8th Nov. 1752.They then evicted the Appin stewarts from their homeland in score settling under the guise of being the government in the west highlands at that time, scapegoats i think not. yours for Scotland, R.C.Dennis.
Re - Jimmy the Sixth,
His boast about ruling Scotland through his pen, was his way of celebrating his family's rise to greater power. It was very bad for Scotland the nation, as it would be for any nation. But, as to the Stewart family, we would all be very proud and no doubt arrogant if WE were in the same position. It's only human nature.
Indeed, some of those kings were just nasty... But then again, there you have the Middle Ages! There has always been rivalry with the clans... Lowlanders and Highlanders, mainly. Being part Scottish [Lowlander], I have to sympathize for the Campbells. They did some unearthly things, but, lets face it, so did the Highlanders. When the clans tried to unite under the Campbells the Highlander families 'accidentally' didn't turn up... There is an argument for both sides when it comes to Lowlander vs. Highlander.
Re, Stu Durham. I do not think the Campbell dynasty of the 17th
-BBC Scotland Moderator-
Hi Robert, looks like your message arrived cropped - apologies this is a problem at our end. If you re-send I'll post your full message.
Ray, Holland. Apologies Ray I called you Ray Hoorn & just realised Hoorn's where you live. Checked Hoorn's history. You've got quite a rich history. Been a town since 716! Until 1357, when the Count of Holland was paid 1500 schilden for city status. Schouten the explorer came from Hoorn & in 1616 sailed round the southern tip of S.America & named it after his hometown: Kaap Hoorn (Cape Horn). Then there was Jan P Coen who founded Batavia (Jakarta) in 1619. Hoorn's got a very interesting history on it's own.
Pt 3.
perished as did the king, putting the nation back about 100 years & leaving us rudderless once again. 3) King James Stewart (VI), spits on the memory of centuries of Scots men, women & children's blood by packing his bags along with jingling Geordie Heriot (17th c Alistair Darling) taking the crown & much of the country's independence over the wall with him in 1603. So how's that for a kick in the Keir Hardies! (Wasnt he a James aswell?) James VI, a Stewart too many! Stewart: Scotland's Achilles heel.
Part 2.
crooks. The Stewarts:- 14th-18th century versions of New Labour MPs. I wouldn't be surprised if a few current New Labour MPs traced their lineage back to the Stewarts' illegitimate lines. Quislings! Let's see, 3 Stewartisms off the top of my head: 1) Sir John Stewart of Menteith captured Scots freedom fighter William Wallace & handed him over to the country's enemy. 2) King James Stewart (IV), a bloody & needless battle at Flodden, where it's said some of the cream of Europe's aristocracy.... PTO>>>
Hello Stu, how you doing mate. Until recently I wasn't too sure about the Jacobites etc and thought that seeing as I was a Scots guy (minus the sectarianism) I should show favour towards the Stewarts. However after learning of the Stewarts in Scotland from 1305-1745, 440yrs! Jeez I should keep my mouth shut til I learn a bit! I'd no idea they were so destructive to Scotland. Some of the biggest things to happen in our history (to our detriment) seem to have been engineered by those self serving...PTO>>
To Ray Hoorn, thanks for the compliment on Sco. Same goes with Hol, I've always found the Dutch people, as continental Europeans, to be very unlike the French & Germans in much the same way as we are unlike the English ('Generally' of course). Dutch people always come across as straight forward people, down to earth & very open, much like us. Although I didnt enjoy the scoreline on Saturday night :-( I enjoyed watching the Dutch people party away with 15,000 Scots without a hint of bother. We'll meet again.
Hi again Brian. I tend to agree. The Stewarts treated Scotalnd shamefully, transmogrifying into English Kings within a generation. I do also question the way the Campbell family has been demonised. I think this is again largely due to the Stewarts who used them to impose Royal will on the highlands, then abandonned them to their enemies during the 17th century. They are also typecast as the villainous enemies of the 'romantic' Stewart supporters - Montrose, Dundee, BPCharlie etc when it could be argued they were the true patriots. Mostly, of course, they were the convenient scapegoats for the Glencoe business - a gross exageration and historical whitewash.
Eventhough the Scottish people are well respected around the world, their history is one of betrayal amongst themselves as happened in the Roman Empire. Their history is a very interesting one and shows how different they are from the English, which in the end may lead to a total separation from the UK. Nowadays it is a fine country to visit.
Why did the History of Scotland stop after James 7th. Scotland has a history which has nothing to do with Hanoverians. The age of enlightenment for one when Scotland was one of the most important cities in Europe, possibly more then a satellite of Germanic states .
-BBC Scotland Moderator-
Hi there, the remainder of Scottish history will continue to be added to the site throughout the year.
The Scotland's History debates ran from October 2008 to March 2011. They were run in conjunction with the TV series A History of Scotland.
By the time of closing the debates had received well over six thousand comments from members of the public.
We would like to thank everyone who contributed and made the debates so lively, informative and engaging.
BBC © 2014The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
The only lasting legacy I know and a lot of the world knows about King James is the Bible he commissioned. If the people of the UK were more spiritual they might still be great.