The Succession: From Elizabeth Ito James I
THE SUCCESSION: FROM ELIZABETH I TO JAMES I
The stability and prosperity of England seemed to many to be a direct result of the wise rule of Elizabeth. It was no accident that the date of her accession was celebrated as a national holiday in England for two centuries. But who would succeed Elizabeth on her death? Elizabeth had never married, and died childless. Henry VIII had gone to immense pains to ensure a smooth transition of power to his children after his death. But with the death of the last of his children, the benefits of Henry's careful planning came to an end. As England's peace and prosperity was so closely linked with the person of the monarch, the question of her successor was of critical importance. Elizabeth having no children, it was not clear who her successor would be.
The eyes of many fell upon the son of Mary Queen of Scots, who had ascended the Scottish throne in 1567. James VI had shown himself to be a staunch supporter of Protestantism in Scotland, and could be relied upon to safeguard Elizabeth's Protestant legacy. Other possible contenders for the English throne were regarded with mistrust on account of their more Catholic religious beliefs.
In one sense, James was the obvious choice to succeed Elizabeth. None of the children of Henry VIII had produced children; it was, therefore, necessary to seek the heir to the English throne from the descendents of Henry VIII's father, Henry VII. As the senior living descendent of Henry VII, James was strategically placed for the succession. Henry VII's elder daughter, Margaret Tudor, had married James IV of Scotland, and James VI was descended from this line through his mother, Mary Queen of Scots.
Yet there were complications. Henry VIII's will, which had established the rules for his successors, had laid down that no alien could succeed to the throne of England. In that James was born in Scotland—and hence was an “alien” by the terms of Henry's will—he was apparently disqualified from the succession. Furthermore, that same will had given priority to the descendents of Henry VII's younger daughter—Mary Tudor—over those of his elder daughter, Margaret Tudor. Yet the descendents on this side of the family were conspicuously unpromising, not least on account of a string of questionable marriages and children of dubious legitimacy.
In the end, James succeeded to the English throne because he was the only obvious viable candidate. He was male, Protestant, and possessed both rank and experience of government. James had a strong hereditary claim to the English throne, and already had children—so the question of who would succeed James would not be as difficult as in the case of the childless Elizabeth.
Portrait of King James I by Cornelius Johnson (1593–1661), engraved by R. White
One of Elizabeth's earliest appointments had been William Cecil—later Lord Burghley—as her secretary of state. Such was the level of confidence that Cecil enjoyed with the queen that it was widely assumed that he would determine the queen's choice of her successor. However, Cecil died in August 1598. An immediate power vacuum resulted. A struggle for power broke out between Cecil's younger son and presumed political heir, and Elizabeth's favorite, the earl of Essex (Robert Devereux). Initially, Essex seemed well placed to ensure that his candidate for the succession would gain the upper hand. He had already approached James VI of Scotland, and had pressed Elizabeth to name him as her successor. Elizabeth had thus far declined to listen to him, but he was confident that she would eventually yield on this point.
In 1599 Essex accepted the position of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, which gave him command of the queen's army in Ireland at a time when rebellion had broken out. This proved to be an unwise move, in that it took him away from court at a critical time. In his absence, Robert Cecil was able to secure his hold on power. Realizing his error, Essex returned to London without permission, and began to organize a rebellion against Elizabeth.
James VI realized that Essex's rebellion could destroy his chances of succeeding to the English throne; there were rumors that James and Essex were in collusion over a possible military solution to the question of the succession. Noting that power was now firmly in the hands of Robert Cecil, James sent his close friend, the earl of Mar, to London to secure Cecil's support. It seems that Cecil concluded that his own position would be best served if James were to succeed Elizabeth, and agreed to support James when the time came. Cecil was as good as his word, and in 1603 secured James's accession to the throne as James I of England. James created Cecil a baron in 1603, a viscount in 1604, and finally made him earl of Salisbury in 1605.
The news that James VI would become king of England galvanized English religious activists, both Protestant and Roman Catholics. Their agenda had been consistently ignored by Elizabeth. They now saw an opportunity to press for radical changes in the English religious situation. Was not James VI of Scotland the monarch of a Protestant nation? And might not the situation be ripe for religious change? Might not the new king allow the implementation of a more radical Protestant agenda that Elizabeth had so carefully evaded?
In fact, things were not quite so straightforward, as we shall see.