How significant were James 1’s financial problems?
Point 1: Particular financial issues
-Inherited 400,000 debt in 1603, rose to 850,000 in 1625.
-High inflation coupled with fixed incomes from crown lands meant that the
crown’s real income has constantly diminished.
-Extremely high expenditure by James on court life, twice as much as Elizabeth.
-Particularly severe problem given the view that ‘for a king not to be bountiful
is a crime’ forcing royal patronage to be high
-Could argue such problems not as severe. 300,000 in subsidies has been paid
already to offset the Elizabethan debt in 1603
-Impositions bringing in 70,000 p.a after Bates case and Book of rates 1608
-Irrelevant since debts rose to 850,000 in 1625, showing financial failure
Point 2: Failure to reform
-Attempted reforms to royal revenue, Great Contract 1610 failed
-Cockadyne project 1616, 40,000 in total but ineffective grants of monopoly,
failed as the Dutch retaliated with protectionism
-Some evidence of reform, Book of Bounty in 1608 restricted James’ spending
-Sale of titles such as knighthoods and peerages, bringing in 90,000 in total.
-Cranfield, managed to decrease royal household expenditure by 50% by 1620
-However, Book of bounty later ignored by James, continued extravagance
-Sale of titles ineffective in the end as such titles depreciated in value.
-Cranfield’s reforms successful but brought with it problems of corruption. They
were supported by Buckingham who then gained through controlling the pa-
tronage system. Cranfield himself was also implicated in corruption and at-
tempts to influence the King by introducing to him his nephew, leading to his
impeachment in 1624.
-Financial reform could not be achieved therefore without significant factional-
ism and corruption
Point 3: Tensions with parliament
-1604-06, Wardship and Purveyances
-Impositions, twice the cause of parliamentary outrage over the issue of free
speech in both 1610 and 1614, with 1614 leading to arrest of 4 MPs
-Tensions over James’ extreme extravagance and granting of 75% of all patron-
age to Scots, James reluctance to Grant subsidy in 1614.
-Could say some successes in Parliament. 400,000 given in 1605-06
-2 extra subsidies in 1621, 1624 3 subsidies with appropriations, showing com-
promise was found.
-Parliament specifically avoided discussing impositions in 1621 to maintain
working relationship with James
-However, most of these scenarios represented successes in cooperation due
to external factors, 1605 Gunpowder plot, 1624 Spanish war.
-James quickly squandered his 400,000 subsidy, 44,000 given to Scottish
favourite right away, all spent by 1610
-Where possible parliament still aimed to limit James’ financial independence.
1610 Great Contract failed because of this.
James I managed his religious tensions well:
No actually
,Point 1: Moderates
-Agreed on moderate reforms post Hampton court Conference 1604 including
new translation of the Bible, published 1611
-Embraced preachers who conformed to moderate views such as Abbott in
1610
-1618 book of sports, repealed after Calvinist outcry
-However, this has broken down increasingly after 1618 when James’ Jacobean
balance was increasingly destroyed.
-Appointment of Laud in 1618, Endorsement of Montagu 1624 and his work ‘An
old gag for a new goose’
-Against outspoken Calvinists, James ordered preachers in 1622 to further qui-
eten ‘rash headed speakers’
Point 2: Radical protestants
-Some successes in compromising
-1603 Millenary petition led to Hampton court conference, reduction in plural-
ism and KJV.
-1619 Synod of Dort, Anti-Arminian stance for English delegates
-Even John Pym, leading puritan in Charles I’s reign praised James’ handling of
religious issues
-However, James more often than not overreacted against his radical opposi-
tion
-1604 Hampton court Conference, outrage against Presbyterianism claiming
‘no bishops, no kings’
-Even though the Puritan resistance to his 1618 Spanish match could be justi-
fied as inevitable since James’ foreign policy aim to be a European mediator did
anger anti-Catholic puritans
-It was ultimately James’ overreaction in the form of the tearing of the Protesta-
tion that caused the majority of the tension
-James was even aided by the fact that the majority of such dissenters were not
overly outspoken. Only 1% of Anglican clergy dissented against the New
Canons of 1605 and majority of Puritan dissenters chose to emigrate, leaving
behind no internal tension.
Point 3: Catholics
-Harsh stance to placate the Protestant Majority. Have to pay recusancy fines
of 20 pounds, banned from London and holding public office, and Jesuits driven
from England
-Moderate stance given they do not cause political tension, even exempted
those who uncovered the Main and Bye Plots from recusancy fines.
-However, James’ success here was due to the fact that Catholic numbers were
insignificant. Only 1% of English population was Catholic, only handful of Con-
spirators against James in Gunpowder and Main and Bye plots, nothing after
1605
-James’ failure to reconcile with parliament over his pro Catholic foreign policy
after 1618 moreover shows failure.
How serious was the threat of Catholics and Puritans?
Point 1: Catholics By themselves
-Violent plots, 1603 Main and Bye + 1605 Gunpowder
,-However, actual numbers of Catholics insignificant. 35,000, 1% English popu-
lation
-No more than 20 actual violent plotters
-No attempts past 1605
Point 2: Puritans
-1603 Millenary petition, 1604 Hampton court conference, angered Calvinists
which turned them increasingly into Puritans
-Public opposition to James’ policies, such as James I
James 1: religious tension
Not important.
Point 1: Religious tensions did show up in parliament
-Hampton Court conference 1604, James agitated by the mention of Presbyterianism.
‘No bishop, no king’. Majority of Puritan demands rejected.
-Spanish match 1621, the commons’ suggestion that Charles pursue a protestant wife
due to strong anti-Catholicism was furiously rejected by James, tearing of the protesta-
tion and parliament was dissolved in the end.
However:
-The tensions in Hampton court were mitigated by a number of reforms including a
new translation of the bible.
-Only 1% of ministers refused to subscribe to 1604 canons.
-The 1621 Parliament was followed by an apology from James regarding his actions.
Overall, reject religion.
Point 2: Religious tensions were present that were not directly presented by parlia-
ment.
-Gunpowder plot 1605, Catholic attempt at assassinating James 1, raised suspicions
against English Catholics.
-Emigration by radical puritans to the Netherlands and the Americas.
-Book of sports 1618, rejected by Puritans.
However:
-The gunpowder plot relieved tensions between MPs and James and gave him 400,000
in subsidies
-Emigration was notably rare, and emigrated radicals poses no more tension in Eng-
land.
-The book of sports was quickly repealed by James following puritan backlash.
Overall, reject religion
Point 3: instead, financial tensions were much more frequently a source of breakdown
in relations.
-Mutual disagreements over the Great Contract dissolved the first parliament, which
saw constant attacks on the right to wardship and purveyances.
-1614, Commons refused to grant subsidies unless impositions were abolished, dis-
solved parliament, arrests carried out.
-1624, subsidies given to James came with appropriation clauses, an reaction to
James’ tendency to overspend on favourites.
-Disputes over religion only ended the 1621 parliament, and this can largely be attrib-
uted to divine rights of kings as James claimed that it was not Parliament’s rights to in-
terfere in Charles’ marriage.
-Overall, religion was less of a consistent and significant issue in James’ parliaments
and all tensions were largely resolved.
, Parliamentary opposition was the main reason for the deterioration
in relations between crown and parliament in the years 04-25
Point 1: Parliament
-Parliament used subsidies as political leverage against the King. Refusal to
grant subsidies 1604 following James’ rejection of presbyterianism in 1604
Hampton court conference
-1614 Addled parliament, parliament attacked the King’s prerogative over im-
positions and led to dissolution after 3 weeks.
-1621 attack on the King’s prerogative over management of royal family affairs
in the Spanish match, again denied subsidy.
-However, parliament has been much more cooperative than disruptive.
-Willingness to grant subsidies after the Gunpowder plot, 400,000 in 1605-06.
-Willingly avoided the issue of impositions in 1621 parliament following the ex-
perience of the 1614 disagreements to pursue working parliament.
-Willing to find compromises with the King with appropriations in the 1624 sub-
sidy despite history of James’ extravagance making parliament unwilling to
grant.
Point 2: King’s actions more responsible
-1604 Buckinghamshire election case, James’ interference in parliamentary
right to free elections.
-James’ extravagance, giving 75% of all patronage to Scottish favourites in ex-
treme amounts (400,000 for example to Robert Cecil) led to parliament being
reluctant to grant subsidies such as in 1614. James then failed to address his
failure but rather responded by arresting 4 outspoken MPs infringing upon par-
liament’s immunity from arbitrary arrest.
-James attacked parliamentary rights to free speech by claiming it had no right
to discuss foreign policy, tearing of the protestation.
-One could argue some compromises were found by James, such as repealing
the Book of Sports in 1618 facing puritan opposition
-Other times the failure to find compromise were parliament’s fault, such as the
1610 Great Contract which failed due to parliament’s unwillingness to grant
James a fixed income that could give him financial independence.
-However, failure of the Great Contract was just as much James’ fault as he re-
fused to abandon Wardships and Impositions.
-Religiously James was also much less of a compromiser especially towards the
end as he endorsed unpopular Arminianism through Montague.
Point 3: External situation to blame
-James’ financial desperation was due to a debt of 400,000 inherited from Eliza-
beth
-Outdated system of fixed feudal land rent which failed to keep up with infla-
tion diminishing the King’s real income.
-Foreign policy also guided by James’ goal of being a mediator in the Palatinate
crisis, which necessitated the Spanish match as a means to mediate European
tensions but also meant that a clash with the political nation’s anti-Catholic in-
terests was inevitable.
-However, external factors could only be blamed to a very limited extent. The
Elizabethan debt of 400,000 has largely been paid for by the ongoing 300,000
subsidy in 1603. Although financial system is becoming outdated, James’ rejec-
Point 1: Particular financial issues
-Inherited 400,000 debt in 1603, rose to 850,000 in 1625.
-High inflation coupled with fixed incomes from crown lands meant that the
crown’s real income has constantly diminished.
-Extremely high expenditure by James on court life, twice as much as Elizabeth.
-Particularly severe problem given the view that ‘for a king not to be bountiful
is a crime’ forcing royal patronage to be high
-Could argue such problems not as severe. 300,000 in subsidies has been paid
already to offset the Elizabethan debt in 1603
-Impositions bringing in 70,000 p.a after Bates case and Book of rates 1608
-Irrelevant since debts rose to 850,000 in 1625, showing financial failure
Point 2: Failure to reform
-Attempted reforms to royal revenue, Great Contract 1610 failed
-Cockadyne project 1616, 40,000 in total but ineffective grants of monopoly,
failed as the Dutch retaliated with protectionism
-Some evidence of reform, Book of Bounty in 1608 restricted James’ spending
-Sale of titles such as knighthoods and peerages, bringing in 90,000 in total.
-Cranfield, managed to decrease royal household expenditure by 50% by 1620
-However, Book of bounty later ignored by James, continued extravagance
-Sale of titles ineffective in the end as such titles depreciated in value.
-Cranfield’s reforms successful but brought with it problems of corruption. They
were supported by Buckingham who then gained through controlling the pa-
tronage system. Cranfield himself was also implicated in corruption and at-
tempts to influence the King by introducing to him his nephew, leading to his
impeachment in 1624.
-Financial reform could not be achieved therefore without significant factional-
ism and corruption
Point 3: Tensions with parliament
-1604-06, Wardship and Purveyances
-Impositions, twice the cause of parliamentary outrage over the issue of free
speech in both 1610 and 1614, with 1614 leading to arrest of 4 MPs
-Tensions over James’ extreme extravagance and granting of 75% of all patron-
age to Scots, James reluctance to Grant subsidy in 1614.
-Could say some successes in Parliament. 400,000 given in 1605-06
-2 extra subsidies in 1621, 1624 3 subsidies with appropriations, showing com-
promise was found.
-Parliament specifically avoided discussing impositions in 1621 to maintain
working relationship with James
-However, most of these scenarios represented successes in cooperation due
to external factors, 1605 Gunpowder plot, 1624 Spanish war.
-James quickly squandered his 400,000 subsidy, 44,000 given to Scottish
favourite right away, all spent by 1610
-Where possible parliament still aimed to limit James’ financial independence.
1610 Great Contract failed because of this.
James I managed his religious tensions well:
No actually
,Point 1: Moderates
-Agreed on moderate reforms post Hampton court Conference 1604 including
new translation of the Bible, published 1611
-Embraced preachers who conformed to moderate views such as Abbott in
1610
-1618 book of sports, repealed after Calvinist outcry
-However, this has broken down increasingly after 1618 when James’ Jacobean
balance was increasingly destroyed.
-Appointment of Laud in 1618, Endorsement of Montagu 1624 and his work ‘An
old gag for a new goose’
-Against outspoken Calvinists, James ordered preachers in 1622 to further qui-
eten ‘rash headed speakers’
Point 2: Radical protestants
-Some successes in compromising
-1603 Millenary petition led to Hampton court conference, reduction in plural-
ism and KJV.
-1619 Synod of Dort, Anti-Arminian stance for English delegates
-Even John Pym, leading puritan in Charles I’s reign praised James’ handling of
religious issues
-However, James more often than not overreacted against his radical opposi-
tion
-1604 Hampton court Conference, outrage against Presbyterianism claiming
‘no bishops, no kings’
-Even though the Puritan resistance to his 1618 Spanish match could be justi-
fied as inevitable since James’ foreign policy aim to be a European mediator did
anger anti-Catholic puritans
-It was ultimately James’ overreaction in the form of the tearing of the Protesta-
tion that caused the majority of the tension
-James was even aided by the fact that the majority of such dissenters were not
overly outspoken. Only 1% of Anglican clergy dissented against the New
Canons of 1605 and majority of Puritan dissenters chose to emigrate, leaving
behind no internal tension.
Point 3: Catholics
-Harsh stance to placate the Protestant Majority. Have to pay recusancy fines
of 20 pounds, banned from London and holding public office, and Jesuits driven
from England
-Moderate stance given they do not cause political tension, even exempted
those who uncovered the Main and Bye Plots from recusancy fines.
-However, James’ success here was due to the fact that Catholic numbers were
insignificant. Only 1% of English population was Catholic, only handful of Con-
spirators against James in Gunpowder and Main and Bye plots, nothing after
1605
-James’ failure to reconcile with parliament over his pro Catholic foreign policy
after 1618 moreover shows failure.
How serious was the threat of Catholics and Puritans?
Point 1: Catholics By themselves
-Violent plots, 1603 Main and Bye + 1605 Gunpowder
,-However, actual numbers of Catholics insignificant. 35,000, 1% English popu-
lation
-No more than 20 actual violent plotters
-No attempts past 1605
Point 2: Puritans
-1603 Millenary petition, 1604 Hampton court conference, angered Calvinists
which turned them increasingly into Puritans
-Public opposition to James’ policies, such as James I
James 1: religious tension
Not important.
Point 1: Religious tensions did show up in parliament
-Hampton Court conference 1604, James agitated by the mention of Presbyterianism.
‘No bishop, no king’. Majority of Puritan demands rejected.
-Spanish match 1621, the commons’ suggestion that Charles pursue a protestant wife
due to strong anti-Catholicism was furiously rejected by James, tearing of the protesta-
tion and parliament was dissolved in the end.
However:
-The tensions in Hampton court were mitigated by a number of reforms including a
new translation of the bible.
-Only 1% of ministers refused to subscribe to 1604 canons.
-The 1621 Parliament was followed by an apology from James regarding his actions.
Overall, reject religion.
Point 2: Religious tensions were present that were not directly presented by parlia-
ment.
-Gunpowder plot 1605, Catholic attempt at assassinating James 1, raised suspicions
against English Catholics.
-Emigration by radical puritans to the Netherlands and the Americas.
-Book of sports 1618, rejected by Puritans.
However:
-The gunpowder plot relieved tensions between MPs and James and gave him 400,000
in subsidies
-Emigration was notably rare, and emigrated radicals poses no more tension in Eng-
land.
-The book of sports was quickly repealed by James following puritan backlash.
Overall, reject religion
Point 3: instead, financial tensions were much more frequently a source of breakdown
in relations.
-Mutual disagreements over the Great Contract dissolved the first parliament, which
saw constant attacks on the right to wardship and purveyances.
-1614, Commons refused to grant subsidies unless impositions were abolished, dis-
solved parliament, arrests carried out.
-1624, subsidies given to James came with appropriation clauses, an reaction to
James’ tendency to overspend on favourites.
-Disputes over religion only ended the 1621 parliament, and this can largely be attrib-
uted to divine rights of kings as James claimed that it was not Parliament’s rights to in-
terfere in Charles’ marriage.
-Overall, religion was less of a consistent and significant issue in James’ parliaments
and all tensions were largely resolved.
, Parliamentary opposition was the main reason for the deterioration
in relations between crown and parliament in the years 04-25
Point 1: Parliament
-Parliament used subsidies as political leverage against the King. Refusal to
grant subsidies 1604 following James’ rejection of presbyterianism in 1604
Hampton court conference
-1614 Addled parliament, parliament attacked the King’s prerogative over im-
positions and led to dissolution after 3 weeks.
-1621 attack on the King’s prerogative over management of royal family affairs
in the Spanish match, again denied subsidy.
-However, parliament has been much more cooperative than disruptive.
-Willingness to grant subsidies after the Gunpowder plot, 400,000 in 1605-06.
-Willingly avoided the issue of impositions in 1621 parliament following the ex-
perience of the 1614 disagreements to pursue working parliament.
-Willing to find compromises with the King with appropriations in the 1624 sub-
sidy despite history of James’ extravagance making parliament unwilling to
grant.
Point 2: King’s actions more responsible
-1604 Buckinghamshire election case, James’ interference in parliamentary
right to free elections.
-James’ extravagance, giving 75% of all patronage to Scottish favourites in ex-
treme amounts (400,000 for example to Robert Cecil) led to parliament being
reluctant to grant subsidies such as in 1614. James then failed to address his
failure but rather responded by arresting 4 outspoken MPs infringing upon par-
liament’s immunity from arbitrary arrest.
-James attacked parliamentary rights to free speech by claiming it had no right
to discuss foreign policy, tearing of the protestation.
-One could argue some compromises were found by James, such as repealing
the Book of Sports in 1618 facing puritan opposition
-Other times the failure to find compromise were parliament’s fault, such as the
1610 Great Contract which failed due to parliament’s unwillingness to grant
James a fixed income that could give him financial independence.
-However, failure of the Great Contract was just as much James’ fault as he re-
fused to abandon Wardships and Impositions.
-Religiously James was also much less of a compromiser especially towards the
end as he endorsed unpopular Arminianism through Montague.
Point 3: External situation to blame
-James’ financial desperation was due to a debt of 400,000 inherited from Eliza-
beth
-Outdated system of fixed feudal land rent which failed to keep up with infla-
tion diminishing the King’s real income.
-Foreign policy also guided by James’ goal of being a mediator in the Palatinate
crisis, which necessitated the Spanish match as a means to mediate European
tensions but also meant that a clash with the political nation’s anti-Catholic in-
terests was inevitable.
-However, external factors could only be blamed to a very limited extent. The
Elizabethan debt of 400,000 has largely been paid for by the ongoing 300,000
subsidy in 1603. Although financial system is becoming outdated, James’ rejec-
