Mary Queen of Scots and James I and VI: A Troubled Relationship

Jun 29, 2010
Jennifer Young

Mary's Tomb n Westminster Abbey - Bernard Gagnon

Separated from her son when he was a baby, Mary Queen of Scots doted on him from a distance. James' viewpoint, shaped by politics, was more cynical.

History records James I of England and VI of Scotland as something of an oddball – an intellectual with ideas about tobacco and witchcraft, a man known for pandering to the whims of his favourites. He was lazy, stubborn and mean. The historian David Durant describes him as ‘one of the most complex neurotics who ever sat on the English throne’.

It’s a modern interpretation to blame all of James’ peculiarities and insecurities on his relationship with his mother, Mary Queen of Scots: there were too many other traumas in his early life for this to be the sole explanation. But it is clear that his relationship with Mary was a distant and often false one, expressed only in letters between them and seen differently by each: and it may well have contributed significantly to the development of his later character.

Fifteenth Century Scotland: Troubled Times

At the time of James’ birth, in 1566, Scotland was a politically unstable nation. Mary Queen of Scots was already the focus of discontent: there were pro-Catholic and pro-Protestant factions, with behind the scenes intervention from Catholic and Protestant nations. Mary’s marriage to Lord Darnley was not only politically contentious but had already broken down.

It was shortly after the birth of the heir to the throne that James’ father, Darnley was murdered. His mother, implicated in the murder in common gossip but never in a court, fled with the Earl of Bothwell whom she scandalously married and was later forced to abdicate in favour of her son. At the age of only 13 months, James became king.

The Impacts of James’ Early Upbringing

After Mary’s abdication, imprisonment in Scotland was followed by exile and imprisonment in England. Mother and son never saw one another again. Fatherless after Darnley’s murder and effectively motherless too, James’ upbringing was a political issue and not one which was undertaken with his emotional welfare in mind.

Political imperatives were the main concerns of the nobles who controlled his upbringing. He was educated as strong Presbyterian which, given that religion was a dividing factor in Scotland, placed him in a camp firmly opposed to that of his mother, for whom Catholicism was a driving force.

His strict upbringing may have contributed to making James the intellectual he became in later life: but it also proved damaging. Along with his Latin, Greek and theology he was ‘trained,’ as Antonia Fraser puts it, ‘to regard his mother as the murderess of his father, an adulteress…and…the protagonist of a wicked and heretical religion’.

James and Mary: Scotland’s Two Monarchs

When James reached adulthood he was clearly capable of thinking for himself. It isn’t known what he really thought of his mother but his letters showed an affection which his actions generally belied. While Mary continued to dote on her son from a distance, she did not understand how his mind had been poisoned against her.

Part of the problem in their relationship was that both had been crowned and anointed monarch and both regarded themselves as Scotland’s rightful ruler. This posed dificulties for James who must, therefore, have been regarded by his mother, technically at least, as a usurper. She sought to solve the dilemma by coming up with the suggestion of an ‘Association’ under which the two would rule jointly.

James paid lip service to this idea but was politically astute enough to known that his best interests lay in ruling alone. His position was complicated by the fact that his longer-term interests lay in eventually succeeding to the English throne and that the Association was not tremendously popular with Elizabeth I. Eventually he rejected the Association completely in a letter to his mother – an action which she regarded as a betrayal (Antonia Fraser).

Mary’s Execution And James’ Response

James’ choice of his own interests above his mother’s can seem callous. Certainly he made little effort to secure her release from captivity in England and, when she was executed in 1587, has been accused of showing only false mourning. ‘In reality,’ says Anne Somerset, ‘James felt no warmth for a woman he could not remember ever having met’. He broke off relations with England temporarily but was swift to accept Elizabeth’s explanation.

Sixteen years after his mother’s death, James finally got what he had long hoped for and acceded to the throne of England. In 1616 he had the body of his ‘dearest mother’ reburied with all honours in Westminster Abbey. If during her life he had done little for her, he can hardly be blamed: but in death he made the gesture and Mary’s tomb remains in the Abbey today.