King James I is best known today for the translation of the Bible that bears his name. In his time, however, James was also known as a religious fanatic who tolerated no departures from his own views. James outlawed Catholicism and was obsessed with prosecuting 'witches'.Check out this link to an article that highlights some of James' practices.
In addition to his persecution of others, King James held a strong belief in the divine right of monarchs. He was not alone in this - many rulers of the time claimed their rule was willed by God and thus any opposition to them was sin. Part of James' persection of Catholics and witches was based on his religion, but a large part was simply because he felt they threatened his rule.
Do think James' fears justify his actions? Do you believe that rulers are appointed by God for a purpose?
I don't believe his fears justified his actions. He had no right to treat the English with such disrespect because of his fear of losing power. I noticed in the link you posted, it said "So with the coronation of a protestant King, the English public felt that at least their religion was safe" meaning King James perceived himself with an appearance that made the public feel trusted. But because of his lack of respect for the public and his religious views, he led himself to have "irreconcilable differences between himself and the English public." Because of the substantial differences, it was only natural for his power to feel threatened. He could have handled himself with public differently. If his actions are what caused the fears he had, then his actions can not be justified. He could have avoided the nasty situations he put himself into if he was a better leader and understood those he was ruling.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Emily, it doesn’t justify his actions. A lot of Kings, or people who hold power, deem themselves to be bidding the work of the lord, but I don’t think it is true. They get this notion in their minds that they are more worthy than everyone else around them, so they can do whatever they please, because they are “one with God”. The sad thing is, is that they think they are actually carrying out good deeds, instead of harming the situation. You see it know a days as well, people tell lies in order to stay in power, the fear that they will lose it doesn’t justify for the fact that they lied to the people.
ReplyDeleteFear is a great motivator, but also causes you to act hastily and irrationally. James' fear, obviously, doesn't justify the persecution of people. Very few things ever justify the persecution of people, but looking back in history, it's happened several times (Jews, Salem Witch Trials, etc.) Is this because of the times or because of the leaders influence?
ReplyDeleteI hope all of you will take the time to read each page of Mark and Cameron's link. There's more to James' shady ruling. Anybody find any links that deal with his persecution of others/witches? And while we're at it--let's not forget to use our Marxist lingo=)
ReplyDeleteI have to agree that James was almost scared of the uprising that the witches and the people that "followed" them could cause. Which was interesting to read that over 40,000 people were executed for being "witches" in England. http://www.suite101.com/blog/stevko1901/uk_king_james_witches_persecution. That's the link that i found that high number of executions. I think James was high on his ego trip, in a way. And he was too content on ruling his people and being in charge, to really know what his people wanted, or even what they cared about.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone else, that King James was not justified AT ALL in his execution of the witches. Like nick said, thats almost exactly like the genocide of the jews, and the Salem witch trials. I think he acted that way as purely a defense to prevent an uprising from his people, and to make them fear him.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell I somehow managed to delete my own comment after I posted it. But thankfully I copied it (yes!) before I did so. Here it is:
ReplyDeleteAfter going back and reading a little bit more in depth on the link posted, it seems that James "also had an extreme distaste for radical papists and not only radical Puritans. He felt that both were 'equivalent threats' against 'his authority as supreme governor.'" So, according to this site, James directly found certain figures of society a threat to his power. His hostility towards these figures in the public only widened the gap, causing those he ruled to disown him. Because of his will to remain on top of the social ladder and maintain his power, this gap can be blamed on James.
I found page 4, paragraph 2 (of the link posted) interesting. The fact that what James did in his private life affected the public's view and disownmentof him is entirely his fault. James must have known he would anger those who knew of him wasting money on his gay lovers. Its almost as if he was purposely alienating himself from his public becauase of all the mistakes he made. Maybe he was just completely ignorant of his action's consequences. If he would've been more aware of his political mistakes, maybe a civil war could have been avoided.
So I just checked out the link that Mary provided and it sickened me to realize that “40,000 people were executed for witchcraft”. James I was insane. It is sad to see that by being of a higher status and superior power he could sentence that many people to death. He defiantly abused his power of king, due to the fact he was afraid.
ReplyDeleteTo answer Nick’s question, “Is this because of the times or because of the leaders influence?” I think that it is a bit of both. The leader defiantly had an influence, since he was the one sentencing the people to death and causing the hunt to begin, but it was also the people at the time. The King was instilling fear in everyone, so they also believed that witches were real.
I agree with all of the previous posters when they say that James' fears did not justify his actions. His fears extraneous, and his actions were even more so. It's amazing to me how history repeats itself--referring to Nick's comment about the Salem witch trials and Hitler's "final solution." It's mindboggling how someone can be so threatened by another's viewpoint. I feel like our differences are so vital. Without them, what would we be? I think we'd be numb and void.
ReplyDeleteI saw, in the link that Mary posted, that James believed in the power of the witches. He said that the crime of witchcraft wasn't a capital offense unless the alleged witch killed a person by sorcery. Does this mean that he only persecuted the witch's that killed people by sorcery? Because 40,000 seems kind of high...
ReplyDeleteIn James defense, many rulers have used fear tactics to keep the proletariat down. With enough paranoia spread through the masses, it becomes easy to rule however you wish. Look at some of the propoganda around WWII or the Red Scare caused by McCarthy, or even *cough* the "War on Terror Cough" *cough* and you will see how easy it is to slide things through when the people are distracted. James probably used witches as a means to solidify his kingship; all who oppose are simply denounced as sympathizers. Yet what bothers me is why witches? Most rulers who have ruled through fear had some leading force, an advisor if you will who fed them the hatred they spread through their countries, who is really respnsible for James reign, him or some unknown puppetmaster?
ReplyDeleteWilly i think you make an excellent point. There had to have been a mastermind, or puppeteer behind the accusations of the witches. I think that if indeed king James were to improve his power or even strike fear into those that were under his reign he would pick something that would be more of a target. For example, the upper class, not the aristrocracy though, because he values their opinion and needs them to appear in court, and keep up the apperance that all is well in his kingdom. Maybe there was a close friend or even official in the court that convinced him of the sheer evil that consumed the witches. Possibly it cold have been of his strong religious beliefs as well. Would the other kings and monarchs have seen king James differently if he had people who made pacts with the devil, which supposedly the witches had, residing in his kingdom and he was doing nothing about it? Perhaps would he have been seen as weak and powerless?
ReplyDeleteI really like the position that Willy took. I didn't really think of it like that before. It makes me think James probably did just use it as a ploy to "solidify his kingship" as Willy put it.
ReplyDeleteI searched "advisor to King James I" and found this link http://www.tudorsandstuarts.com/monarchs/jamesi.html
It mentions a man, Robert Cecil.
(It might be a stretch but..) Maybe he could have been that mystery advisor/puppetmaster Willy asked about.
I agree with Nick that James used fear to rule over people. He used witches to create fear so that people would follow him because he would protect them. And Willy you brought up desraction, I totally agree with that. I think even today the government tries to slip things under our noses with distraction.
ReplyDeleteFear makes people act crazy, but that does not justify what they do. Of course it was not just for James I to persecute the witches
ReplyDeleteTo answer Nick's question, "is this because of the leader's influence or is it the time?", I believe it is both. In history, all of the leaders that I can think of that lead the persecution of people were in some way crazy. Also I believe it is the time the events were in.
I agree with everyone that it is easier to control people when they are in fear of something. Its easier to get people to do something, react, when they are scared. For example after 9/11 happened more and more people agreed with the government that we should go to war. At the peek of Americans being frightened they reacted and wanted war. But now, almost eight years later less and less people agree with the war. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/21/iraq.poll/. This link provides a statistic. The sample is small but I think it still represents what alot of people think.
Hey, Cameron, what about adding that link that I sent to you last week? It definitely mentioned men who were "quite" important to James.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Willy's point about witches. I think he might have feared them more because of the supernatural power they possessed. He might have feared them more because they he had no control over what they did.
ReplyDeleteI dont think his fear justified his actions. Just because he was king, doesnt give him the right to torment others, because of "fear". Im not really sure how to answer camerons second question though, isnt God soppoused to be the "ruler?"
Ok its not letting me edit the post but here is another link for everyone to check out: http://www.nwlink.com/~scotlass/jamesvi.htm
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about what Julie said about James being insane. While I can not condone his actions, I am not ready to label him as insane yet. James' paranoia had a very real basis in the gunpowder plot. I think there is a post about that later so I will try not to ruin but basically it was an assassination plot. So there were clearly people conspiring against him. I would say that his fear was legitimate, but misdirected. Would it change anyone's mind about James' actions if his fears could be substantiated?
I would agree with Cameron in that I don't think he was insane. I just think he wanted that power, he wanted control. And what he did was a little out there, or crazy, but I believe a lot of people will do anything to get people to follow them, to get power. Just take a look at some of our political campaigns, some people say the most outrageous things just to get ahead.
ReplyDeleteMany of the above comments spoke about fear being the motivator for King James' actions. (See pretty much every single comment above). I do very much think that King James' fear of the proletariat rising was a variable in his overall actions, however I think that his religious beliefs might have had just as much. I don't really believe in a conscious God, but I do believe in the human belief. I think that our individual beliefs enough to make those beliefs true...at least for the individual. I don't think that these beliefs constitute hurting any other human or one's self, but those might just be my beliefs talking (woah, confusing!).
ReplyDeleteWell, it seems like we're all in agreement, but I'll go ahead and say that if there is a combination of fear and lack of knowledge, a ruler or a group of people can get as many followers as he can that are scared and would rather agree with who is strongest rather than seek enlightenment or stand by what they know is right, because to stand by the truth and have pride meant to be persecuted (like in the Crucible; Proctor's pride led him to be tried as a witch). One heck of a run on sentence, I didn't lose you, did I? It really ties back into what I said before: fear is an excellent motivator.
ReplyDeleteBack to Cameron's question, no, it wouldn't change my mind if James' fears were substantiated. Like Nick said earlier, very few things can justify the persecution of people. Along with fear, I think James did this because he was addicted to power. When other people know what he's capable of (the persecution of witches), they become afraid of him, hoping that he doesn't accuse them of witchcraft. More and more people begin kissing his feet, and that's what he wants. Did I just reference James to Hitler?..
ReplyDeleteI found this link to be really interesting!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/james/jamesbio.htm
The second paragraph especially supports what I said in my previous comment. "Buchanan instilled in James political theories which included the idea that the king is beholden to the people for his power, a belief which James later came to reject in favour of Divine Right kingship."
Our beliefs control our lives to an incredible extent. Part of me wants to say "Can you blame him, really?" but then I again, my personal beliefs say that he was wrong and he SHOULD blame him. We are responsible for our own actions.
I really liked what Nick and Zach said. Being addicted to power is something that can cause a circumstance like King James and his persecutions to occur.
ReplyDeleteI also liked what ashley said about our beliefs controlling our actions. If i was looking at it through my beliefs, i would say it is completley wrong for King James to persecute these people. But thinking from his side..he could have been thinking, "I need to do whatever it takes to keep my position safe." In a way i feel like he was being selfish and was only worried about his fears.
So it seems we are all in agreement about the inexusability of James' actions, but what about the second question? I don't think that rulers are necessarily placed in their position by God. End even if they were, I don not believe, as James did, that their authority is unquestionable because "it comes from God". Rulers are just as human as those they rule and as such are capable of making mistakes. I think that James belief in divine right is an excellent example of Marx's belief that religion was an "opiate of the masses".
ReplyDelete**I apologize for missing the bulk of the debate, but I've obviously forgotten this assignment existed.**
ReplyDeleteEvery "good" ruler needs their enemy. A force to fight against that will solidify their leadership, and unite their country as a whole. James simply used his personal fears/dislikes to spark brotherhood amongst his countrymen. Modern American leaders use the same tactic. Both Bush and Obama have made clear their enemies in the middle east. Why should we hold King James I of higher expectations than we hold our own rulers?
I think going with what Cash said is very true. To add on to it. I think he's using his power to manipulate people into getting more power. Blaming people for being witches was a good way to frighten his followers because they didn't know who would be accused next. They all kept their acts together and feared him most since he called them out. Why would he make something like witches up though? Where did he gain that idea from.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statement made by Mr. Sanders (surprisingly). This was all a ploy to quell rebellion within his own country. No one would appose a man who had stricken an obedient fear in the eyes of his people. with an entire nation geared toward the opinion of the governing body completely, any individual protestor would stand no chance of being dubbed anything but a witch.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that fear is a strong motivator and I have to admit that if these rulers claim it is the will of god, than that gets some of the people to back off and let them win. But the rest, well they don't want it so James had to scare them into letting him rule. It's logical that he would use his peoples weakness against themselves. Not a good trait of any ruler. This could be his way of ruling out those who can threaten his power.
ReplyDeleteSo James seems to be addicted to power like Danielle said, and he rules by god, but people had to have questioned why he would kill so many people. God would never tell someone, even a king, to kill people because they were witches. Those people had to obey and love him however because he could have desided to kill people for another reason and no one wanted to die.
ReplyDelete