Apart from seeing a Prime Minister spout on about democracy, this a Prime Minister who wants to repeal the Human Rights Act, it was the sight of a child saying he can go to school today because of Magna Carta, that turned my stomach. The child had obviously been told to say this. Magna Carta has nothing whatsoever to do with children going to school today . It has nothing to do with democracy . The Barons would have been absolutely appalled at the idea that 800 years later Magna Carta was being used to help "the lowest in society " take their place and have rights. The clauses of Magna Carta have nothing to do with equality and democracy. The ideas that it was an ancient right of protection is the stuff of myth and legend. It is quite incorrectly seen as a symbol of liberty. It wasn't.
Magna Carta, the facts, myths and legends briefly
by Veronica
While the celebrations of the 800th anniversary had many cheering from the rooftops, I had a rather different view of the myths surrounding this supposedly iconic charter.
 Magna Carta American freedom alliance |
 King John's seal Wikipedia |
Magna Carta
the facts, myths and legends briefly
Apart from seeing a Prime Minister spout on about democracy, this a Prime Minister who wants to repeal the Human Rights Act, it was the sight of a child saying he can go to school today because of Magna Carta, so infuriated me. The child had obviously been told to say this. Magna Carta has nothing whatsoever to do with children going to school today . It has nothing to do with democracy . The Barons would have been absolutely appalled at the idea that 800 years later Magna Carta was being used to help "the lowest in society " take their place and have rights. The clauses of Magna Carta have nothing to do with equality and democracy. The ideas that it was an ancient right of protection is the stuff of myth and legend. It is quite incorrectly seen as a symbol of liberty. It wasn't.
Magna Carta was an agreement between the King, Church and Barons that secured the rights of first and foremost the Church and then the Barons. Indeed the first and last clauses concern the rights of the Church. What is little known is that indeed, King John had scrapped Magna Carta within a few weeks of it being sealed. He had not in fact signed it. It was sealed.
Background to the Magna Carta
John's father King Henry 11 had tried to set up legal and administrative systems in England that would make for smooth government but a feuding family, his son King Richard's expensive Crusade campaigns had left the country in a poor shape financially. John was a good administrator and built up the finances of the land very well, largely through impositions placed on the Church and Barons. This made him very unpopular and he became even more so when he lost his inherited French lands to France. He spent several years trying to regain them, lost the money and taxed the Barons further so upon his return to England was facing a rebellion. The Church and the Barons were ready for confrontation. The rights of the poor had nothing to do with the confrontation. The Barons were in this for themselves as was the Church.
Events and consequences
John met the Barons and Church leaders at Runneymede near Windsor in June 1215 and after a few days had thrashed out details which protected the Barons and Church from excessive taxation, imprisonment and set out the rights of Church, Barons and Freemen. Serfs and peasants who accounted for much of the population, were totally excluded. It promised to protect church rights, protect for the Barons from illegal imprisonment, give Barons access to swift justice, and limit payments to the Crown.
Within weeks John had appealed to the Pope saying that Magna Carta compromised the Pope's rights and had Magna Carta overturned. It was issued and reissued many times over the next decades.
Most of the clauses in Magna Carta are obsolete today. The clauses have no bearing on 21st Century life and it is good that some certainly no longer apply, such as Clause 11 which states that if anyone dies in debt to a Jew, the Jew doesn't have to be repaid. Laws of liberty and democracy have superseded Magna Carta.
Nowhere in Magna Carta is democracy mentioned. But its clauses have been adapted into many national constitutions and it is held in reverence as the role model for a constitution, The American Bill of Rights for one. Magna Carta was a temporary peace agreement between King, Church and Barons.
It was never intended to be a symbol of democracy and equality.
Do you see Magna Carta as a symbol of democracy ?
You might also like
An Overview of the Wars of the Roses Part TwoThe Medieval struggle for the English crown continues. The House of York and ...
Dick Whittington and His CatDick Whittington and His Cat is a less-known fairy tale about a poor boy who ...
Who Was Robin Hood?England's legendary folk hero was a historical character, but he came to a ba...
Blarney Castle and Gardens, County Corkon 06/01/2023
An Cóbh, Corcaigh, Eireon 05/29/2023
Dublin ; The Book of Kellson 04/04/2023
The Bee Tree Community CIC;- an online support communityon 08/24/2022
Comments
It interests me that Magna Carta is a three-way interaction of barons, Church and king.
It impels me to mull why no societal money- and power-holders between barons and king merited mention.
Might King John have been leaving viscounts, marquesses and dukes alone or might he have been not quite so outrageous according to their perceptions of perceived infractions and intrusions?
Two or three men were combined into one mythical Robin Hood. There is Robhod, who in 1226 and 1227 did not appear in Wakefield court when summoned; Robin of Loxley in the time of Henry the Third;and Robert Hood, outlawed for treason by one of the Edwards sometime later. However, the ballad of Robin Hood and Alan a Dale refers to situations in the time of King John, who was forcing Saxon heiresses to marry Normans. On the other hand, the tale that Robin was an archer links strongly to the time of the three Edwards. What we have is a legend built up over time.Yes, there was a Robin hood, if you identify him with one of these three men, but he was a scoundrel who, as you say, bribed the poor to stop them handing him over.Court records still exist in Wakefield,which is at the northern end of what was then Sherwood Forest, and they mention Robhod. though the 1227 one calls him Hobdehod.
Was Edward the First a good king, yes as long as you consider subduing Wales and launching unjustified invasions of Scotland and France, during which he launched a massacre at Berwick upon Tweed, as constituting a good king! I regard him as a murderous thug.
I am aware of that, but I am taking a long term view of the significance of the charter in people' consciousnesses.
Derdriu Thank you
Robin Hood as a legend is still seen as a jolly fellow. The truth of the matter is that he was an outlaw and bribed the poor not to give him up to the authorities by giving them part of his loot.
Edward 1 is seen as a good king but the others you mention don't get a look-in. Robin is traditionally believed to have lived in the time of King Richard The Lionheart an Richard's brother John.
Frank
Magna Carta was never for "society ". It was for the benefit of the church and nobility. The ordinary people had nothing to do with it.
Magna Carta has a good reputation on this side of the water, for it was a step on a long path towards a more just society, but it was not the whole process.
Veronica, Very well done!
The Navajo believe that good leaves this world with death whereas evil lingers. It's interesting that King John's reputation here lingers as evil, possibly because of losing the royal treasure in the Wash and predominantly because of Magna Carta's and Robin Hood's good reputations on this side of the Atlantic pond. And yet King John may have been an effective administrator and chief financial officer whereas Magna Carta at its time and in fact may have been very different from its twenty-first-century presentations.
Also, historians here prefer Kings Henry III, Edward I or Edward II, not King John, as Robin Hood's monarch. What is the interpretation on your side of the pond?
The Magna Carta is usually thought of in a symbolic way, as others have said. It's helpful to examine what was actually written without losing its symbolic significance. Thanks for clarifying.
Whether we as,citizens wish to celebrate iMagna Carta is one thing; whether it is worth celebrating is another.
I think that people took it up and declared their support for it because it promoted the values that would eventually give rise to democracy.
But the " celebrations" were an 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta not what it came to mean. And Magna Carta was certainly nothing to celebrate.