James I's 'Foreign Policy' Essay

I just finished an essay, in preparation for my exam tomorrow, on James I's foreign policy - if you are incredibly bored, feel free to read over my essay for me and critique or suggest any improvements, if you have any. (click the post title to view the essay)

"Explain the factors that led to James I’s decision to pursue a peaceful Foreign Policy. Evaluate the political consequences of this decision for James and for Charles I in 1649."



An important factor leading to James I’s decision to pursue a peaceful Foreign Policy was the financial issues which he’d inherited. By maintaining a peaceful Foreign Policy, he would have one less financial drain to worry about and would not have to ask Parliament for war subsidies because his finances were a source of conflict for James and his parliaments. Another strong contributing factor was his own personality which included his desire to be remembered as a modern day Solomon, therefore finding solutions through diplomacy opposed to confrontation, such as marrying his children off to European monarchs in hope of creating a power balance. The consequences of this decision were that his financial woes didn’t allow him to install peace in Europe as his policy was extremely unpopular and further conflict was created between James and his Parliaments because of James’ lack of funds. Further consequences of this decision affected his son Charles I as his Catholic marriage created harbouring suspicions regarding Charles’ religious leanings.

When James ascended to the English throne, he took over a precarious financial position and, as an educated man, he understood war would only escalate England’s financial strive. This is evident through how James ended war with the Spanish upon his accession in order to alleviate his financial burden. A result of a peaceful Foreign Policy would, along with lessening the financial drain further, allow trade to prosper and royal revenue to increase as a result therefore giving James two motivations to pursue a peaceful Foreign Policy with one peaceful and another practical. Another reason would be as a result of the friction between James and his Parliaments as he did not want to feel obligated to request Parliament for war subsides, unlike his son who would, in that position, choose to simply go over Parliament’s head. It is for this reason also that James decided to end war and pursue a peaceful policy as he would be able to avoid the need for war subsidies altogether.

James’ personality was a strong contributing factor in what caused him to pursue a peaceful Foreign Policy because he believed in the motto “Beauti Pacifi”, which meant he wanted to settle political unrest using diplomacy rather than confrontation because he wanted to be remembered as a modern Solomon. To be a mediator for peace throughout Europe, James took the first step by marrying his children off to European Monarchs in the hope of creating European balance of power. However, Charles did not foresee the problems which would be caused as a result of his son, Charles’, marriage to the Catholic French princess, Henrietta Maria. It was also beneficial to James’ desire to be a C17th Solomon that, as King of Scotland, he had no history with the Spanish, or of the English hatred of them. In 1604, the Treaty of London was signed with the Spanish which brought to an end the twenty years of Anglo-Spanish conflict. By doing this, James stamped his pacifist authority on English foreign policy.

The consequences of Charles I’s decision to enforce a peaceful Foreign Policy were that, despite his peace-making intentions, his financial woes and the policy itself created political instability. James already had to deal with the handicap of being viewed as a foreign King and, on top of that, Protestant and Puritan MPs were extremely dubious of James’ desire to become allies with Spain. His pro-Spain foreign policy was hugely unpopular, perhaps unsurprisingly because England had only fairly recently faced the Spanish Armada. Further conflict was created between James and Parliaments because of his belief in the Divine Right of Kings which, although perhaps was not as fervent as his son’s, nonetheless increased tensions with his Parliament as his MPs wanted to exercise their right to advise on foreign policy which was expressed in the 1621 “Protestation of the Commons”, which James himself tore from the journal of the Commons. Furthermore, James’ ordinary revenue proved to be insufficient and, with tensions with Parliament running high, he had to resort to other means of raising funds including the sale of wardships, purveyance and forced loans which cause even more political friction. It is for these reasons that James never really succeeded in his dream of peacefully uniting England, Scotland and Ireland and faced conflict with Kirk and his plantations in Ireland sowed the seeds for hundreds of years of conflict.

For James’ son, and successor, Charles I, his Catholic marriage, caused as a result of James’ pacifist foreign policy, was always a barb in Parliament’s side and he was arguably never going to be able to maintain peaceful relations with them while they suspected him of dubious religious leanings. Also, Charles embraced his father’s belief in the Divine Right of Kings in a fervent manner, which was a significant stepping stone as to why Parliament became increasingly intolerant of the King’s apparent desire for Absolutism. The political instability and shortage of revenue, along with, in Charles’ perspective, Parliament;s refusal to help, eventually led Charles to eleven years of Personal Rule in 1629 with the resentment cause by this absolutist act contributing heavily towards the Civil War, as well as his own execution in 1649. It is thought that, although Charles must bear most of the responsibility for his own execution, his father’s desire to be some form of Biblical king of wisdom, whilst maintaining a peaceful foreign policy, was aksi a factor in which brought his son to the block.

James never really had a chance in achieving a perfectly peaceful foreign policy, as well as maintaining his sought after modern Solomon status, because of the increasing hardships brought on by the lack of funds. The increasing tensions between James and his Parliaments as a result of his money shortage served only to escalate James’ problems, meaning James was barely able to install peace in his Parliaments, let alone in Europe. Poor decisions, such as the Catholic marriage of his son, eventually led only to hurt Charles I’s chances of ever being remembered as a successful monarch and most certainly ruined his hopes of being remembered as a modern day Solomon.