Talk:James VI and I

Template:Vital article

Citations

The citations are at the moment a mess. I propose to homogenise them as was done for the articles Charles I of England and Charles II of England. -- PBS (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Title

I think it not correct to say: 'In Scotland, James was "James the sixth, King of Scotland", until 1604.' His title would have been Rex Scotorum - "King of Scots" rather than "Rex Scotiae" - king of Scotland. Likewise his mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, was Regina Scotorum rather than Regina Scotiae. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.220.6 (talk) 08:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

They were used interchangeably, though the form rex Scotorum was more common in Latin especially in the early medieval period when rex Anglorum, rex Francorum, etc., were also commonly used in Latin documents. DrKay (talk) 08:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

It states in thecEntrh for James 6th/1st that his son was Charles 1st King of England. He was not :- He was King of the United Kingdom( Scotland, England and Ireland) Reaoch (talk) 13:01, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Mary I versus Mary in InfoBox and Succession Box

For the pas two days, the InfoBox and Succession Box has been jumping back and forth between using Mary I and simply Mary to refer to Mary, Queen of Scots. While I do not have any problem using just Mary to refer to the queen within the article itself, the purpose of the succession section of InfoBoxes and Succession Boxes is to show the succession, and James was preceded by Mary I, not by Mary. There is another Mary in Scotland, Mary II, who reigned from 1689 to 1694. Yes, I am aware that some people may be confused because Mary I of England and Mary, Queen of Scots reigned concurrently, but that problem does not belong in the succession boxes. European monarchs as a whole are not very creative with names and two people reigning in two neighbouring countries who happen to have the same name is not that unusual. Just see the War of the Two Pedros. The succession lists need to use Mary I to refer to Mary I of Scotland since that is her regnal name. What the rest of the article uses to refer to her can be her popular attribution, but the purpose of the succession lists is to show continuity, and that requires the use of ordinals.  – Whaleyland (Talk • Contributions) 23:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

It's too confusing, and unusual, and that is shown by the fact that it keeps being changed or challenged. Last night, an IP tried to change it within 20 minutes of your edit because they were confused. It is a disservice to the target readership if they are confused rather than educated by the article. I don't see how it can be her "regnal name" either. Surely she was just called "Mary" during her reign? Celia Homeford (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Reverted at Monarchy of Canada, reverted at infobox at William the Conqueror, reverted at infobox at Mary, Queen of Scots, all within hours. This just isn't my day. GoodDay (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

IMHO, we should be showing his predecessor's name as Mary I, since there's also a Mary II. -- GoodDay (talk) 08:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

None of the sources in the article use this form, which is much less common than the usual form (as shown in the requested move). Disambiguation from Mary II is unnecessary because Mary II is not mentioned anywhere in the article, and people don't get them confused (unlike Mary Tudor who is constantly mixed up with the Queen of Scots). DrKay (talk) 08:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Religion

The practice of baptism is considered a Christian sacrament of admission and adoption, and a child baptized into the Christian faith is reasonably considered to be of the baptismal denomination until having converted to another religion. James being separated from his mother involuntarily and coerced into Protestantism by opportunistic noblemen hardly validates conversion until his beliefs are affirmed upon achieving his majority, which he did. Thus the child was born, received into the Catholic faith, and later converted to Protestantism. His mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, thought to be a Catholic martyr, and her husband both consented to the baptism. - Conservatrix (talk) 09:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any citations that say he converted at the age of majority. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

In this case James clearly cannot be "reasonably considered" to have remained Catholic at all, since he and everybody else thought him a Protestant. The proposition you make is very dubious in any case, I'd have thought. Please stop wasting editor's time with this nonsense. Johnbod (talk) 11:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Attributing religion to infants is preposterous and I strongly oppose such fundamentalism on Wikipedia. Surtsicna (talk) 14:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Ping Celia Homeford, Johnbod, Surtsicna: To have remained Catholic? Yes, the child was Catholic and later converted to Protestantism. I merely seek to account for his intial reception into the Church of Rome. - Conservatrix (talk) 18:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

No, at no point in his life did James consider himself a Roman Catholic. Surtsicna (talk) 18:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

This is a debate of whether religion is conferred or self-recognized. Shall I change the religion of Charles II of England for his death-bed conversion? - Conservatrix (talk) 18:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

No, since it was probably conferred on him without his knowledge or consent. DrKay (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Charles swore his intended conversion to Louis XIV of France, though possible this was a ploy to engage France in the Third Anglo-Dutch War. I happen to respect DrKay and will await the input of other users before pressing the issue.
- Conservatrix (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll add my voice to those saying the addition of Catholic to the infobox was inappropriate, misleading, and unnecessary. DrKay (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Marriage

James I was the first married man to ascend to the throne of England since Richard III 130 years ago. Is this worth a mention somewhere? Robin S. Taylor (talk) 16:37, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

No. See comment at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Caroline_of_Ansbach&diff=prev&oldid=847910457: unsourced material should not be added, even if correct. DrKay (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Stature

Is there any definitive source for James' height? I have seen him variously described as "short" and of "medium height". Martinevans123 (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

King of Israel

The page on British Israelism has this line, "Anglo-Israelism has also been attributed to Francis Drake and James VI and I,[6] who believed he was the King of Israel.[1]"

However, there is no mention of this belief on this page. Could someone look at these sources and then add this information here? Also, since the Authorized Version is so commonly known as the King James Version, there should also be some explanation of his thoughts on this translation. Was it something he wanted? Did it help him in any way? Did it suit a political purpose? That information would belong here.

188.239.0.177 (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2018 (UTC)