From and after the 5th of April 1603 Holyrood, though not quite left to
the rats, was no longer the home of royalty. King James’s parting
promise that he would revisit his native kingdom at least once every
three years passed out of his mind; and not till 1617, fourteen years
after the ecstatic delight of his removal to the banks of the Thames,
did he find it worth while to recross the Tweed. Holyrood, with the
other royal palaces of Scotland, was then refurbished for his temporary
accommodation; but with that exception, and the further exception of two
subsequent visits of Charles I. to Edinburgh, there was to be no sight
of a sovereign face for many a day in the towered edifice under Arthur
Seat. For Scotland as a whole, indeed, the five-and-thirty years which
intervened between 1603 and 1638 may be described as that period of her
history during which, though still retaining a nominal apparatus of
independent autonomy, in the shape of a resident Scottish Privy Council
and an occasional meeting of a Scottish Parliament, she was governed
essentially and in the main from London through the post. “This I must
say for Scotland, and may truly vaunt it,” said King James in a speech
of rebuke to his somewhat troublesome English Parliament on the 31st of
March 1607: “here I sit and govern it with my pen; I write, and it is
done; and by a clerk of the council I govern Scotland now,—which my
ancestors could not do by the sword.” The words were perfectly true; and
they remained true for his son and successor, Charles I., till that
point in his reign when the soul of Scotland flashed out again in her
“National Covenant,” electrifying the dormant Puritanism of England, and
initiating the great Seventeenth Century Revolution in all the British
Islands.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account