Fun and/or useful links and additional materials:

Documentaries:

Monarchy

Narrated and written by Professor David Starkey

ASIN:B003AND1SM

Available on Netflix and Amazon Instant Video

A History of Britain

Narrated and written by Simon Schama

ASIN:B003K025Z0

Available on Netflix and Amazon Instant Video

Magna Carta: Muse and Mentor

Includes accompanying hardcover text, edited by Randy J. Holland

Link:

King John and Magna Carta in Popular Culture

Link:

Essays:

Joshua Rozenberg: Magna Carts in the Modern Age, The British Library

Link:

Carolyn Harris, King John and Magna Carta in Popular Culture

Link:

Modern America and Magna Carta

And a few other interesting texts (focusing on Magna Carta in mass and/or popular culture and contemporary politics):

Magna Carta and its Modern Legacy

Robert Hazell and James Melton

Cambridge University Press

ISBN:9781107533103

Link to Cambridge University Press:

The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

Samuel P. Huntington

Simon and Schuster

ISBN-13:978-1451628975

Link to Simon and Schuster:

Cinematic Adaptations and Historical Novels (a selection … there are many!):

The adored and spirited daughter of England's greatest knight, Mahelt Marshal lives a privileged life. But when her beloved father falls foul of the volatile and dangerous King John, her world is shattered. The king takes her brothers hostage and Mahelt's planned marriage to Hugh Bigod, son of the Earl of Norfolk, takes place sooner than she expected. Mahelt and Hugh come to care for each other deeply, but Hugh's strict father clashes with the rebellious Mahelt. When more harsh demands from King John threaten to tear the couple's lives apart, Mahelt finds herself facing her worst fears alone, not knowing if she-or her marriage-will survive.

A brilliant story of a vibrant woman in a tyrant's world,To Defy a Kingis another impeccably researched masterpiece from a beloved author.

The story of Henry VIII, his battles with the church, and with his own brilliant chancellor, Thomas Beckett.

The tale of Henry II and his battles with his wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine, the church, his sons, and the barons. Starring Peter O’toole and Katherine Hepburn. Based on the play by James Goldman.

In 13th-century England, a small group of Knights Templar fight to defend Rochester Castle against the tyrannical King John. (This one got panned.)

Some preliminary comments:

What is the West’s legacy to the world? What is the West’s legacy to Magna Carta? Consider Samuel Huntington’s 1996 essay in Foreign Affairs, certainly the most venerable international relations and foreign policy magazine of the post WW-II era:

“In recent years Westerners have reassured themselves and irritated others by expounding the notion that the culture of the West is and ought to be the culture of the world. This conceit takes two forms. One is the Coca-colonization thesis. Its proponents claim that Western, and more specifically American, popular culture is enveloping the world: American food, clothing, pop music, movies, and consumer goods are more and more enthusiastically embraced by people on every continent. The other has to do with modernization. It claims not only that the West has led the world to modern society, but that as people in other civilizations modernize they also westernize, abandoning their traditional values, institutions, and customs and adopting those that prevail in the West. Both theses project the image of an emerging homogeneous, universally Western world – and both art to varying degrees misguided, arrogant, false, and dangerous.”

Huntington made these points in 1996, which seems as distant a world today as were, say, the worlds of 1936 and 1948 – the former historical moment immersed in revolution, threats of fascist ascendancy, and economic misery, the latter a world decimated by 6 years of war and shadowed by nuclear weapons. But Huntington’s point – or his question – still rings true: What does the West offer to world?

His answer? Pop culture, consumer culture, fashion trends, and all such ephemera are by nature just that – ephemeral. What is at the core of the West’s legacy? Huntington is explicit: “The essence of Western culture is the Magna Carta, not the Magna Mac.”

I start here because Huntington makes an argument that may be lost amidst the trend towards relativism and multiculturalism (things that should not be thrown out with the bathwater, to be sure); that is, he pares down the West’s defining features and finds them embedded in, of all things, Magna Carta. His list includes such things as the Classical legacy (including Roman law and Greek philosophy) and European languages (the multiplicity of European languages is a virtue, he tells us). But he adds the following telling things:

  • Separation of spiritual and secular authority
  • Rule of law
  • Social pluralism and civil society
  • Representative bodies
  • Individualism, codified and embodied in individual rights and liberties

In some way, each of these can be traced to the Magna Carta.

Text: Magna Carta: Muse and Mentor (Randy Holland, published by Thomson Reuters and the Library of Congress)

  • Preface by Chief Justice Roberts:
  • He starts as follows:
  • “The north wall of the Courtroom at the Supreme Court of the United States features a frieze of “Great Lawgivers” in an historic procession. In the center stands King John holding the Magna Carta. The king, forced to cede some of his power and submit to the rule of law, appears forlorn. But those who cherish freedom have cause for celebration.” (xi)
  • He adds:
  • Whether King John and the barons knew it or not, the events at Runnymede 800 years ago marked the commencement of a social transformation…. Magna Carta laid a foundation for the ascent of liberty and the rule of law. True, the barons sought to advance their own narrow interests … [but] they bolstered their case with statements of principle that spoke to broader issues of governance, including due process, separation of powers, freedom from arbitrary action, and the elements of a fair trial… the seeds of what we now regard as essential liberties.
  • Why is this important?

The practical foundation:

The meeting at Runnymede (a swampy, marshy field outside of London, particularly suitable for a negotiation because it was so unsuitable for battle) was intended to provide a moment for negotiations that would end an outright revolt and civil war by the barons against the king. Like the U. S. Declaration of Independence some 570 years later, in includes attention to very specific concerns, and enumerates a number of grievances and remedies (in this regard, it is more of a governing document than the Declaration, which is largely a list of grievances aimed at the king and his policies). Some of Magna Carta’s provisions concern things as pedestrian (though essential for everyday life) as fishing rights and practices on the Thames, hunting rights in the forests, riparian claims, and more. The text gets very pragmatic at times, dismissing specific individuals from office (among others, Gerard d’Athee and his relations).

The political and philosophical aura or frame:

  • But in the midst of these very, very immediate concerns, the text never seems to take its focus off of the larger issues that underpin its inscription: the relations of royal authority to the baronage, to the church, and to the people (though “people” was a narrow caste at this point). In short, what’s interesting here is the way in which immediate, practical, even supremely urgent political concerns gave rise to grander ruminations on the nature of liberty, due process, property rights, freedom of religion, and more. What this suggests – or at least what I’d like to suggest – is that even the most pedestrian interests are always embedded in the firmament of political and philosophical understandings that often remain inexplicit, yet present. Magna Carta takes steps, as it unfolds, in elaborating the foundational principles behind particular rulings, enactments, and decisions. Consider, in this context, philosopher John Rawls claims that, when all is said and done, “justice” should be understood as a kind of “fairness.” What could be simpler? More elegant? More exasperatingly pregnant with possibility?

In short, every legal act – from levying a jaywalking fine to placing limitations on Presidential power over private communications – is infused with philosophical attributes. All law, Magna Carta tells us in its own pragmatic way, is a kind of philosophy of life, and a reflection on the good life (or at least the best we can do in the polis). Grand ideas can come from immediate, pressing needs.

Some useful chronological elements:

Sequence of relevant kings (and others):

1154-89: Henry II (struggles with Becket and church)

Thomas Becket (1118-1170)

- Beckett was a commoner who rose to powerful status

- His competence leads to his recommendation by Theobald (Archbishop of - Canterbury) to act as King Henry II’s chancellor, at which he excels.

- Henry II adores Becket

- Becket is appointed Archbishop in 1162 after death of Theobold

- Rift grows between Henry II and Becket over autonomy/authority of church in relation to the crown (the secular/religious divide)

- Becket flees to France, lives in exile for 7 years

- Returns to England on basis of a compromise offered by Henry

- But … Henry (purportedly in an offhand manner) utters the phrase: “Who is going to rid me of this troublesome priest?” (While the exact statement may be apocryphal, the essence of Henry’s opinion and its impact it quite true.)

- A group of Knights attack Becket on the altar at Canterbury, where he dies.

- Henry is (apparently) truly dismayed. For a year he offers a public penance, including being flogged.

1189-99: Richard I (the Lionheart) (son of Henry II, brother of John)

- Richard spends almost all of his reign on Crusades in the Mideast.

1199-1216: John (dies of dysentery during campaign to restore authority against Barons, after his royal treasury was lost in a quicksand field in “the Wash,” between Lincolnshire and Norfolk)

1216-70: Henry III (son of John)

- Henry III is particular important for reissuing (many times, with amendments), Magna Carta.

- Most definitive final version of Magna Carta is issued in 1225, and is the most commonly referenced afterwards.

What areas of law seem most pragmatically pertinent to the creation of MC?

  • Laws of succession
  • Taxing authority
  • Trusts and Estates (inheritance)
  • Property law
  • Jurisdictional matters (separation of church and state)
  • Criminal law (trial by peers; elementary rules of criminal procedure)

Magna Carta and the Church:

  • MC was a product of rebellion of Barons, but many high churchmen were Barons too. They were part of the English landholding system.
  • Church had national and international “spiritual” authority, creating tension between King (domestic sphere) and Pope (international sphere)
  • Churchmen in England (around 870s, under Alfred, which was relatively centralized compared to the Continental nations) were useful, largely because of their literacy and administrative skills. The state and Church were not really in competition for jurisdiction.
  • William of Normandy (Battle of Hastings, 1066) attempts to extend secular control over higher church personnel (themselves landholders in large part)
  • Split:
  • Secular courts apply Anglo-Saxon customary law (local custom rules)
  • Church courts apply canon law
  • Result? A bit of competition between the two types of jurisdiction
  • A big issue in the debate was whether clergy (clerks) would be subject to secular or canonical law.
  • Henry II (1154-89) assumes power, and in 1163 Thomas Becket is elected as Archbishop of Canterbury.
  • Becket refuses authority of royal courts (secular authority) in relation to clergy.
  • Becket flees in exile for France (1165), then returns in 1170, with no resolution of clergy/secular legal authority issue.
  • Becket is assassinated before his altar, ostensibly with Henry II’s consent (though he did not plan the killing). Becket is canonized, and as a result the English clergy gain freedom from criminal jurisdiction of common law until the nineteenth century (!) – a serious defeat for royal control of church.
  • Coronation Charter of Henry I becomes blueprint for Magna Carta, which includes a large concession to the authority of the Church
  • NB: Coronation Charter of Henry is model for Magna Carta

Magna Carta and the Towns:

  • Towns were semi-autonomous entities for whom the Magna Carta was a greatly useful document.
  • As towns grew, inter-town trade grew, resulting in more income for merchants.
  • Merchants were constantly in need of reliable rules for taxation and privileges from king (thus Magna Carta was important)

Magna Carta and the Barons:

  • Magna Carta codifies the uniquely English feudal system
  • Succession is an almost constant issue in early English history

(not too much of interest here, other than fact that Barons were in almost constant tension with John)

Magna Carta and the Common Law:

  • MC is not directly related to the growth of English common law, but it does contrast with renewed interest and development of Roman law on the continent.
  • Norman England (1066-?): Law is a merger of Old English law with Norman law. This coincides with a steadily increasing division between civil and criminal jurisdiction.
  • Introduction of concept of felony (under authority of “Kings’ peace”)
  • Felon: c. 1300, "one who deceives or commits treason; one who is wicked or evil; evil-doer," used of Lucifer and Herod, from Old Frenchfelon"evil-doer, scoundrel, traitor, rebel, oath-breaker, the Devil" (9c.), from Medieval Latinfellonem(nominativefello) "evil-doer," which is of uncertain origin, perhaps from Frankish*fillo,*filljo"person who whips or beats, scourger" (source of Old High Germanfillen"to whip"); or from Latinfel"gall, poison," on the notion of "one full of bitterness." Celtic origins also have been proposed.
    Another theory (advanced by Professor R. Atkinson of Dublin) traces it to Latinfellare"to suck" (seefecund), which had an obscene secondary meaning in classical Latin (well-known to readers of Martial and Catullus), which would make afelonetymologically a "cock-sucker." OED inclines toward the "gall" explanation, but finds Atkinson's "most plausible" of the others.
    Also by c. 1300 in English in a general legal sense "criminal; one who has committed a felony," however that was defined. Century Dictionary notes, "the term is not applicable after legal punishment has been completed." In Middle English it also was an adjective, "traitorous, wicked, malignant." Australian official James Mudie (1837), coinedfelonry"as the appellative of an order or class of persons in New South Wales,--an order which happily exists in no other country in the world."
  • Two kinds of jury at time of MC:
  • Presentment jury: Based on inquest (probably brought to England by the Normans)
  • Basically an info-gathering procedure (a bit like a grand jury?)
  • Used to inquire about property holdings (assembled in Domesday Book)
  • Under oath, people must tell King’s representatives about their property holdings (and those of others)
  • A bit like a census
  • Use of “presentment” jury allowed a community to take action against criminals, whereas in earlier times the injured party or his family had to bring an “appeal” (accusation) against one who had injured him. The poor or weak man was thus at a decided disadvantage against a richer or more powerful man. Then, if convincing, the jury would “present” the offender – i.e., indict him. A trial by ordeal (hot irons, etc.) would follow.
  • Recognition Jury: Used in disputes about property and property rights (used only in a royal court)
  • Injured party purchases a writ from a royal chancery
  • Four types of writs:
  • Utrum: Used in disputes as to whether a piece of property was held for the service of prayer only, in which case it came under church jurisdiction.
  • Disseisin: Purchased to claim recent dispossession of property.
  • Mort d’ancestor: Purchased to claim an inheritance if one was heir to a property owner at the time of owner’s death.
  • DarreinPresnetment (last presentment): Purchased in disputes about who had the right to name a priest or other churchman when a vacancy occurred.
  • This method was very popular … One might compare it to federal jurisdiction today (greater objectivity, perhaps?)
  • Important point about MC here:
  • Provisions about law and legal process expands from John’s need to be concerned with narrow Baronial interests to a document that covered all free men in the land, some of whom were of a very modest status. (46 Drew)
  • MC extends law’s protection to “all free men of our kingdom,” including “all the liberties written below.” (NB)
  • Charter of the Forest (1217):
  • Added to MC to cover issues about use, ownership, etc., of forest. From 1217 on, MC and CF are issued together (as if one document). A bit like an amendment that becomes an essential part of the original document.

Magna Carta and Parliament:

  • The notion that MC led to the growth of Parliament as we know it today is a myth: Those writing the MC had no concept of an institution like the English Parliament.
  • Indeed, their “right” in relation to an unjust king was the preservation of a “right” of rebellion.
  • Baronial attempts to limit the power of the king in the 13th, 14th, an 15th centuries all relied on replacing the king with a group of barons. No such effort succeeded. (50 Drew)
  • “Parliaments” as we know them today started to crop up in Edward I’s realm (1272-1307), largely related to baronial/monarchical disputes.
  • Edward III (1327-77) sees composition of an assembly roughly akin to today’s Parliament … though still inchoate.
  • By the time of the Stuart monarchy, Parliament was rather well established and powerful.
  • Parliamentarians, led by Edward Coke, successfully argued that MC guaranteed such English rights as:
  • (1)trial by jury,
  • (2) habeas corpus,
  • (3) equality before the law,
  • (4) freedom from arbitrary arrest,
  • (5)parliamentary control of taxation.

“Magna Carta in America”