Magna Carta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Magna carta)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the charter issued on 15 June 1215, and later modified. For the Irish law, see Great Charter of Ireland. For other uses, see Magna Carta (disambiguation).
Magna Carta
Magna Carta (British Library Cotton MS Augustus II.106).jpg
One of only four surviving exemplifications of the 1215 text, Cotton MS. Augustus II. 106
Created 1215
Location The British Library and the cathedrals of Lincoln and Salisbury
Author(s) John, King of England, his barons and Stephen Langton
Purpose Peace treaty

Magna Carta (Latin; "the Great Charter"), also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Latin; "the Great Charter of the Liberties of England"), was a charter issued by King John at Runnymede, near Windsor, England, on 15 June 1215.[a] Originally an attempt to negotiate a peace between the unpopular King and a group of rebel barons, overseen by the Archbishop of Canterbury, it promised the protection of church rights, protection for the barons from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown, to be implemented through a council of 25 neutral barons. Neither side stood behind their commitments and it was annulled by Pope Innocent III, leading to civil war. After John's death, the regency government of John's young son, Henry III, reissued the document in 1216, stripped of some of the more radical content, in an unsuccessful bid to build political support for their cause. At the end of the First Barons' War in 1217, it formed part of the peace treaty agreed at Lambeth, where it acquired its name Magna Carta, referring to is considerable size. Short of funds, Henry reissued the charter again in 1225 in exchange for a grant of new taxes, and his son, Edward I repeated the exercise in 1297, this time confirming it as part of England's statute law.

The charter became part of English political life and was typically renewed by each monarch in turn, although as time went by and the fledgling English Parliament passed new laws, it lost some of its practical significance. At the end of the 16th century, however, there was an upsurge in interest in Magna Carta. Lawyers and historians at the time believed that there was an ancient English constitution, going back to the days of the Anglo-Saxons, that protected individual English freedoms. They argued that the Norman invasion of 1066 had overthrown these rights, and that Magna Carta had been a popular attempt to restore them, making the charter an essential foundation for the contemporary powers of Parliament and legal principles such as habeas corpus. Although this historical account was badly flawed, jurists such as Sir Edward Coke used Magna Carta extensively in the early 17th century, arguing against the divine right of kings propounded by the Stuart monarchs. Both James I and his son Charles I attempted to suppress the discussion of Magna Carta, until the issue was curtailed by the English Civil War of the 1640s and the execution of Charles.

The political myth of Magna Carta and its protection of ancient personal liberties persisted after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 until well into the 19th century. It influenced the early American colonists in the Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the American Constitution in 1789, which became the supreme law of the land in the new republic of the United States. Research by Victorian historians showed that the original 1215 charter had concerned the medieval relationship between the monarch and the barons, rather the rights of ordinary people, but the charter remained a powerful document, even after almost all of its content was repealed from the statute books in the 19th and 20th centuries. Magna Carta still forms an important symbol of liberty today, often cited by politicians and campaigners, and is held in great respect by the British and American legal communities, Lord Denning famously describing it as "the greatest constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot".[1]

In the 21st century, four exemplifications of the original 1215 charter remain in existence, held by the British Library and the cathedrals of Lincoln and Salisbury. There are also a handful of the later 1216, 1217, 1225 and 1297 versions in public and private hands, including copies of the 1297 charter in both the United States and Australia. The original charters were written on vellum sheets using quill pens, in a particular style of abbreviated Latin. Each was sealed with the royal great seal using beeswax and resin, most of which have not survived. Although academics refer to the 63 numbered "clauses" of Magna Carta, these are a modern system of numbering, introduced by Sir William Blackstone in 1759, as the original charters formed a single, long unbroken text. The four original 1215 charters will be on joint display at the British Library in 2015 to mark the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta.

History[edit]

13th century[edit]

Background[edit]

Main article: John, King of England
An illuminated picture of King John riding a white horse and accompanied by four hounds. The king is chasing a stag, and several rabbits can be seen at the bottom of the picture.
King John on a stag hunt

The origins of Magna Carta were as a potential peace treaty between royalist and rebel factions in 1215 shortly before the outbreak of the First Barons' War. England was ruled by King John, the third of the Angevin kings, but although the kingdom had a robust administrative system, the nature of government under the Angevin monarchs was ill-defined and uncertain.[2][3] John and his predecessors had ruled using the principle of vis et voluntas, or "force and will", taking executive and sometimes arbitrary decisions, often justified on the basis that a king was above the law.[3] Many contemporary writers believed that monarchs should rule in accordance with the custom and the law, and take counsel of the leading members of the realm, but there was no model for what should happen if a king refused to do so.[3]

John had lost most of his ancestral lands in France to King Philip II in 1204 and had struggled to regain them for many years, raising extensive taxes on the barons in a concerted effort that culminated in an expensive, but unsuccessful, military expedition in 1214.[4] John was also personally unpopular with many of the barons, many of whom owed money to the Crown, and little trust existed between the two sides.[5][6][7] In the face of this defeat and distrust, rebel barons in the north and east of England organised resistance to his rule within a few months of John's return.[8][9] They took an oath that they would "stand fast for the liberty of the church and the realm", and demanded that the King confirm the Charter of Liberties that had been declared by Henry I in the previous century, and which was perceived as protecting the rights of the barons.[10][9][11] The rebel leadership was unimpressive by the standards of the time, even disreputable, but were united by their hatred of John.[12]

Contemporary mural of Pope Innocent III

John held a council in London in January 1215 to discuss potential reforms, and sponsored discussions in Oxford between his agents and the rebels during the spring.[13] Both sides appealed to the Pope for assistance in the dispute.[14] During the negotiations, an initial document was produced by the rebellious barons, which historians have termed "the Unknown Charter of Liberties", seven of the articles of which later appeared in the "Articles of the Barons" and the subsequent charter.[15][16] John hoped that Pope Innocent III would give him valuable legal and moral support and accordingly played for time; the King had declared himself to be a Papal vassal in 1213 and correctly believed he could count on the Papacy for help.[17][14] In the meantime, John began to recruit mercenary forces from France, although some were later sent back to avoid giving the impression that the King was escalating the conflict.[13] John took an oath to become a crusader, a move which gave him additional political protection under church law, even if many felt the promise was insincere.[18][19]

Letters of support from the Pope arrived in April but by then the rebel barons had organised into a military faction. They congregated at Northampton in May and renounced their feudal ties to John, marching on London, Lincoln and Exeter.[20] John's efforts to appear moderate and conciliatory had been largely successful, but once the rebels held London they attracted a fresh wave of defectors from the royalists.[21] The King offered to submit the problem to a committee of arbitration with Pope Innocent III as the supreme arbiter, but this was not attractive to the rebels.[22] Instead, John instructed Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had been working with the rebel barons on their "Articles" or demands, to organise peace talks.[21][23]

Great Charter of 1215[edit]

The Articles of the Barons, 1215, held by the British Library

John met the rebel leaders at Runnymede, near both the royal fortress of Windsor Castle and the rebel base at Staines, on 10 June 1215, where they presented him with their draft demands for reform, the "Articles of the Barons".[21][23][24] Stephen Langton's pragamatic efforts at mediation over the next ten days turned these incomplete demands into a charter capturing the proposed peace agreement; a few years later, this was later renamed Magna Carta, meaning "Great Charter".[25][26][24] By 15 June, general agreement had been made on a text, and on 19 June, the rebels renewed their oaths of loyalty to John and copies of the charter were formally issued.[24][23]

Although, as the historian David Carpenter has noted, the charter "wasted no time on political theory", it went beyond simply addressing individual baronial complaints, and formed a wider proposal for political reform.[21][27] It promised the protection of church rights, protection from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice and, most importantly, limitations on taxation and other feudal payments to the Crown, with certain forms of feudal taxation requiring baronial consent.[28][8] It focused on the rights of free men — in particular the barons — and not serfs and unfree labour.[27] Under what was later labelled "clause 61", or the "security clause", by historians, a council of 25 neutral barons would be created to monitor and ensure John's future adherence to the charter, while the rebel army would stand down and London would be surrendered to the King.[29][30] [b]

John and the rebel barons did not trust each other, however, and neither side seriously attempted to implement the peace accord.[29][33] The rebel barons suspected that the proposed baronial council would be unacceptable to John and that he would challenge the legality of the charter; they packed the baronial council with their own hardliners and refused to demobilise their forces or surrender London as agreed.[34][35] Disputes began to emerge between those rebels who had expected the charter to return lands that had been confiscated and the royalist faction.[36] Despite his promises to the contrary, John appealed to Pope Innocent for help, observing that the charter compromised the Pope's rights as John's feudal lord.[37] Innocent obliged; a letter from Rome arriving that September declared the charter "not only shameful and demeaning, but illegal and unjust" and excommunicated the rebel barons.[37][36]

By then violence had broken out between the two sides, and, less than three months after it had been agreed, John and the loyalist barons firmly repudiated the failed charter: the First Barons' War erupted.[38][39][36] The rebel barons concluded that peace with John was impossible, and turned to Philip II's son for help, the future Louis VIII, who claimed the English throne for himself.[40][36] The war soon settled into a stalemate, with neither side able to claim victory. The King became ill and died on the night of 18 October, leaving the nine-year-old Henry III as his heir.[41]

List of participants in 1215[edit]

Great Charter of 1216[edit]

Although the Charter of 1215 was a failure as a peace treaty, it was resurrected under the new government of the young Henry III as a way of drawing support away from the rebel faction. On his deathbed, King John appointed a council of thirteen executors to help Henry reclaim the kingdom, and requested that his son be placed into the guardianship of William Marshal, one of the most famous knights in England.[44] William knighted the boy, and Cardinal Guala Bicchieri, the papal legate to England, then oversaw his coronation at Gloucester Cathedral on 28 October.[45][46][47]

The young King inherited a difficult situation, with over half of England occupied by the rebels.[48][49] He had substantial support, however, from Guala who intended to win the civil war for Henry and punish the rebels.[50] Guala set about strengthening the ties between England and the Papacy, starting with the coronation itself, where Henry gave homage to the Papacy, recognising the Pope as his feudal lord.[51][45] Pope Honorius III declared that Henry was the Pope's vassal and ward, and that the legate had complete authority to protect Henry and his kingdom.[45] As an additional measure, Henry took the cross, declaring himself a crusader and so entitled to special protection from Rome.[45]

The war was not going well for the loyalists, but Prince Louis and the rebel barons were also finding it difficult to make further progress.[52][53] John's death had defused some of the rebel concerns, and the royal castles were still holding out in the occupied parts of the country.[54][53] In a bid to take advantage of this, Henry's government encouraged the rebel barons to come back to his cause in exchange for the return of their lands, and reissued a version of the 1215 Charter, albeit having first removed some of the clauses, including those unfavourable to the Papacy and Clause 61, which had set up the council of barons.[55][56] The move was not successful and opposition to Henry's new government hardened.[57]

Great Charter of 1217[edit]

Charter of the Forest, 1217, held by the British Library

At the end of the civil war in 1217, the content of the charters of 1215 and 1216 were used to produce a peace treaty between the warring factions. In February 1217, Louis set sail for France to gather reinforcements.[58] In his absence, arguments broke out between Louis's French and English followers, and Cardinal Guala declared that Henry's war against the rebels was the equivalent of a religious crusade.[59] This resulted in a series of defections from the rebel movement, and the tide of the conflict swung in Henry's favour.[60] Louis returned at the end of April, but his northern forces were defeated by William Marshal at the Battle of Lincoln in May.[61][62]

Meanwhile, support for Louis's campaign was diminishing in France and he concluded that the war in England was lost.[63] The French prince negotiated terms with Cardinal Guala, under which he would renounce his claim to the English throne; in return, his followers would be given back their lands, any sentences of excommunication would be lifted and Henry's government would promise to enforce the charter of the previous year.[64] The proposed agreement soon began to unravel amid claims from some loyalists that it was too generous towards the rebels, particularly the clergy who had joined the rebellion.[65]

In the absence of a settlement, Louis remained in London with his remaining forces, hoping for the arrival of reinforcements from France.[65] When the expected fleet did arrive that August, it was intercepted and defeated by the loyalists at the Battle of Sandwich.[66] Louis entered into fresh peace negotiations, and the factions came to agreement on the final Treaty of Lambeth, also known as the Treaty of Kingston, on the 12 and 13 September 1217.[66] The treaty was similar to the first peace offer, but excluded the rebel clergy, whose lands and appointments remained forfeit; it included a promise, however, that Louis's followers would be allowed to enjoy their traditional liberties and customs, referring back to the Charter of 1216.[67] Louis left England as agreed and joined the Albigensian Crusade in the south of France, bringing the war to an end.[63]

A great council was called in October and November to take stock of the post-war situation, when the Charter of 1217 was probably formulated and issued.[68] The charter resembled that of 1216, although some additional clauses were added to protect the rights of the barons over their feudal subjects and the restrictions on the Crown's ability to levy taxation were watered down.[69] There remained a range of issues around the management of the royal forests, which involved a special legal system that had formed a source of considerable royal revenue; complaints existed over both the implementation of these courts, and the limits of the royal forests.[70] A complementary charter was created, the Charter of the Forest, pardoning existing forest offences, imposing new controls over the forest courts and establishing a review of the forest boundaries.[70] To distinguish the two charters, the term magna carta libertatum, "the great charter of liberties", was used by the scribes to refer to the larger document, which in time became known simply as Magna Carta.[71][72]

Great Charter of 1225[edit]

The 1225 version of Magna Carta issued by Henry III, held in the National Archives

Magna Carta became increasingly embedded into English political life during Henry III's minority.[73] As the King grew older, his government slowly began to recover from the days of the civil war, recovering control of the counties and beginning to raise revenues once again, taking care not to overstep the terms of the charters.[74] Henry remained a minor, however, and his government's legal ability to make permanently binding decisions on his behalf was limited. In 1223, the tensions over the status of the charters became clear in the royal court, when Henry's government's attempted to reassert its rights over its properties and revenues in the counties, facing resistance from many communities that argued — albeit sometimes incorrectly — that the charters protected the new arrangements.[75][76] This resulted in an argument between Archbishop Langton and William Brewer over whether the King had any duty to fulfill the terms of the charters, given that he had been forced to agree to them.[77] On this occasion, Henry gave verbal assurances that he considered himself bound by the charters, enabling a royal inquiry into the situation in the counties to progress.[78]

Two years later, the question of Henry's commitment to the charters reemerged, when Louis VIII of France invaded Henry's remaining provinces in France, Poitou and Gascony.[79][80] Henry's army in Poitou was under-resourced and the province quickly fell.[81] It became clear that Gascony would also fall unless reinforcements were sent from England.[82] In early 1225 a great council approved a tax of £40,000 to dispatch an army, which quickly retook Gascony.[83] [84] In exchange for agreeing to support Henry, the barons demanded that the King reissue Magna Carta and the Charter of the Forest.[85][86] The content was almost identical to the 1217 versions, but this time the King declared that the charters were issued of his own "spontaneous and free will" and confirmed them with the royal seal, giving the new Great Charter and the Charter of the Forest of 1225 much more authority than the previous versions.[87][86]

The barons anticipated that the King would act in accordance with these charters, subject to the law and moderated by the advice of the nobility.[88] Uncertainty continued, and in 1227, when he was declared of age and able to rule independently, Henry announced that future charters had to be issued under his own seal.[89][90] This brought into question the validity of the previous charters issued during his minority, and Henry actively threatened to overturn the Charter of the Forest unless the taxes promised in return for it were actually paid.[89][90] In 1253, Henry confirmed the charters once again in exchange for fresh taxation.[91]

Henry placed a symbolic emphasis on rebuilding royal authority, but his rule was relatively circumscribed by the Magna Carta.[92][47] He generally acted within the terms of the charters, which prevented the Crown from taking extrajudicial action against the barons, including the fines and expropriations that had been common under his father John.[92][47] The charters, however, did not address the sensitive issues of the appointment of royal advisers and the distribution of patronage, and they lacked any means of enforcement if the King chose to ignore them.[93] The inconsistency with which he applied the charters over the course of his rule alienated many barons, even those within his own faction.[47] Despite the various charters, the provision of royal justice was inconsistent and driven by the needs of immediate politics: sometimes action would be taken to address a legitimate baronial complaint, on other occasions the problem would simply be ignored.[94] The royal courts which toured the country to provide justice at the local level, typically for those lesser barons and the gentry claiming grievances against the major lords, had little power, allowing the major barons to dominate the local justice system.[95] Henry's rule became lax and careless, resulting in a reduction in royal authority in the provinces and, ultimately, the collapse of his authority at court.[95][47]

In 1258, a group of barons seized power from Henry in a coup d'état, citing the need to strictly enforce Magna Carta and the Charter of the Forest, creating a new baronial-led government to take forward reform through the Provisions of Oxford.[96] When the issues were presented to Louis IX of France in 1263-64 to adjudicate on, the reformist barons argued their case based around Magna Carta, suggesting that it was inviolable under English law and that the King had broken its terms.[97] England slipped back into the Second Barons' War, which was won by Henry's son, Prince Edward, who argued that the reformers had taken matters too far, and were themselves acting contrary to the terms of Magna Carta.[98] In 1267, after the war was over, Henry issued the Statute of Marlborough; one of its clauses included a fresh commitment to observe the terms of the charters.[99]

Great Charter 1297: Statute[edit]

1297 version of Great Charter

Edward I of England reissued the Charters of 1225 in 1297 in return for a new tax.[100] "Constitutionally, the Magna Carta of Edward I is the most important".[101] This version remains in Statute today (albeit with most articles now repealed—see below).[102][103]

The Confirmatio Cartarum (Confirmation of Charters) was issued in Norman French by Edward I in 1297,[104] and was similar to the parva carta issued by Henry III in 1237. A translation to English can be found in Pickering's Statutes at Large.[105] In the Confirmation, Edward reaffirmed Magna Carta and the Forest Charter,[106] as a concession for tax money. A passage mandates that copies shall be distributed in cathedral churches throughout our realm, there to remain, and shall be read before the people two times by the year, hence the presence during the month of May 2014 at St Edmundsbury Cathedral,[107][108] and the permanence of a copy in Salisbury Cathedral. The second article is where it is confirmed that

AND we will, That if any judgement be given from henceforth contrary to the points of the charters aforesaid by the justices, or by any other our ministers that hold plea before them against the points of the charters, it shall be undone, and holden for nought.

As part of the Remonstrances the nobles sought to add another document the De Tallagio to the Charters but without success.[100] The principle of taxation by consent was reinforced; however the precise manner of that consent was not laid down.[109] Pope Clement V annulled the Confirmatio Cartarum in 1305.[110]

As part of the reconfirmation of the Charters in 1300 an additional document was granted, the Articuli super Cartas (The Articles upon the Charters).[111] It was composed of 20 articles and sought in part to deal with the problem of enforcing the Charters.[112] In 1305 Edward I took Clement V's Papal bull annulling the Confirmatio Cartarum to effectively apply to the Articuli super Cartas though it was not specifically mentioned.[113]

14th-15th centuries[edit]

Magna carta cum statutis angliae, (Great Charter with English Statutes), early 14th-century

During the reign of Edward III, six measures were passed between 1331 and 1369, which were later known as the Six Statutes. They sought to clarify certain parts of the Charters. In particular, the third statute, of 1354, redefined clause 29, with free man becoming no man, of whatever estate or condition he may be, and introduced the phrase due process of law for lawful judgement of his peers or the law of the land.[114]

The impermanence of the Charter required successive generations to petition the King to reconfirm his Charter, and hopefully abide by it. Between the 13th and 15th centuries Magna Carta would have a history of being reconfirmed, 32 times according to Sir Edward Coke, but possibly as many as 45 times.[115] Often the first item of parliamentary business was a public reading and reaffirmation of the Charter, and as in the previous century, parliaments often exacted confirmation of it from the monarch, resulting in over forty reconfirmations by the early fifteenth century.[116] The Charter was confirmed in 1423 by Henry VI.[117][118][119]

The judgement of 1387 confirmed the supremacy of the Royal Prerogative within the constitution.[120] By the mid 15th century Magna Carta ceased to occupy a central role in English political life.[114] In part this was also due to the rise of an early version of Parliament and to further statutes, some based on the principle of Magna Carta. The Charter, however remained a text for scholars of law. The Charter in the statute books was correctly thought to have arisen from the reign of Henry III and was seen as no more special than any other statute, and could be amended and removed. It was not seen (as it was later) as an entrenched set of liberties guaranteed for the people against the government. Rather, it was an ordinary statute that defined a certain level of liberties, most of which could not be relied on—least of all against the king. Therefore the Charter had little effect on the governance of the early Tudor period.[121]

16th century[edit]

Version of Charter of 1217, produced between 1437 and c. 1450

During the 16th century the interpretation of Magna Carta and the First Barons' War shifted.[122] Henry VII took power at the end of the turbulent Wars of the Roses, followed by Henry VIII, and extensive propaganda under both rulers promoted the legitimacy of the regime, the illegitimacy of any sort of rebellion against royal power and the priority of supporting the Crown in its arguments with the Papacy.[123]

Tudor historians rediscovered the Barnwell chronicler who was more favourable to King John than other contemporary texts, and, as historian Ralph Turner describes, they “viewed King John in a positive light as a hero struggling against the papacy", showing "little sympathy for the Great Charter or the rebel barons”.[121] Pro-Catholic demonstrations during the 1536 uprising cited Magna Carta, accusing the King of not giving it sufficient respect, which probably did not please Henry VIII.[124]

The first printed edition of Magna Carta was probably the Magna Carta cum aliis Antiquis Statutis of 1508 by Richard Pynson, although the early printed versions of the 16th century incorrectly traced origins of Magna Carta to 1225 and Henry III, rather than to John and 1215, and accordingly worked from the later text.[125][126][127] An abridged English language edition was published by John Rastell in 1527, and in 1534 George Ferrers published the first unabridged English language edition of Magna Carta, establishing the numbering of the Charter into 37 clauses.[128]

At the end of the 16th century there was an upsurge in antiquarian interest in England.[124] This work concluded that there were a set of ancient English customs and laws, temporarily overthrown by the Norman invasion of 1066, which had then been recovered in 1215 and recorded in Magna Carta, which in turn gave authority for important 16th century legal principles.[129][124][130] Modern historians note that although this narrative was fundamentally incorrect — many refer to it as a "myth" - it took on great importance to the legal historians of the time.[130][c]

The antiquarian William Lambarde, for example, published what he believed were the Anglo-Saxon and Norman law codes, tracing the origins of the 16th-century English Parliament back to this period, albeit misinterpreting the dates of many documents concerned.[129] Francis Bacon argued that Clause 39 of Magna Carta was the basis of the 16th century jury system and judicial processes.[135] Other antiquarians, Robert Beale, James Morice and Richard Cosin argued that Magna Carta was a statement of liberty and a fundamental, supreme law empowering English government.[136] Those that questioned these conclusions, such as the Member of Parliament Arthur Hall, faced sanctions.[137][138]

17th - 18th centuries[edit]

Political tensions[edit]

Jurist Edward Coke made extensive political use of Magna Carta

In the early 17th century, Magna Carta became increasingly important as a political document in the arguments over the authority of the English monarchy.[139] James I and Charles I both propounded greater authority for the Crown, justified by the doctrine of the divine right of kings, and Magna Carta was cited extensively by their opponents to challenge the monarchy.[132]

Magna Carta, it was argued, recognised and protected the liberty of individual Englishmen, made the king subject to the common law of the land, formed the origin of the trial by jury system and acknowledged the ancient origins of Parliament: because of Magna Carta and this ancient constitution, an English monarch was unable to alter these long standing English customs.[132][139][140][141] Although the arguments based on Magna Carta were historically inaccurate, they nonetheless carried symbolic power, as the charter had immense significance during this period, antiquarians such as Sir Henry Spelman describing it as "the most majestic and a sacrosanct anchor to English Liberties".[132][139][130]

Sir Edward Coke took a lead in using Magna Carta as a political tool during this period. Still working from the 1225 version of the text — the first printed copy of the 1215 charter only emerged in 1610 - Coke spoke and wrote about Magna Carta repeatedly.[130] His work was challenged at the time by Lord Ellesmere, and modern historians, such as Ralph Turner and Claire Breay, have critiqued Coke as "misconstruing" the original charter "anachronistically and uncritically", and taking a "very selective" approach to his analysis.[132][142] More sympathetically, J. C. Holt noted that the history of the charters had already become "distorted" by the time Coke was carrying out his work.[143]

John Lilburne criticised Magna Carta as an inadequate definition of English liberties

In 1621, a bill was presented to Parliament to renew Magna Carta and, although this failed, subsequently during Darnell's Case in 1627, the lawyer John Selden argued that the right of habeas corpus was backed by Magna Carta.[144][145] Coke supported the Petition of Right in 1628, which cited Magna Carta in its preamble, attempting to extend the provisions, and to make them binding on the judiciary.[146][147] The monarchy responded by arguing that the historical legal situation was much less clear cut than was being claimed; there was a clamp-down on the activities of antiquarians, Coke was arrested for treason and his proposed book on Magna Carta suppressed.[145][148] Charles initially did not agree to the Petition of Right, and refused to confirm Magna Carta in any way that would reduce his independence as king.[149][150]

England descended into civil war in the 1640s, resulting in King Charles' execution in 1649. Under the republic that followed, some questioned whether Magna Carta, an agreement with a monarch, was still relevant.[151] Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector, disdained Magna Carta, at one point describing it as "Magna Farta" to a defendant who sought to rely on it, he still agreed to rule with the advice and consent of his council.[152][153]

The radical groups that flourished during this period held differing opinions of Magna Carta. The Levellers rejected history and law as presented by their contemporaries, holding instead to an "anti-Normanism"' viewpoint.[154] John Lilburne, for example, argued that Magna Carta only contained some of the freedoms that had supposedly existed under the Anglo-Saxons before being crushed by the Norman yoke.[155] The Leveller Richard Overton described the charter as “a beggarly thing containing many marks of intolerable bondage”.[156] Both however saw Magna Carta as a useful declaration of liberties that could be used against the governments they disagreed with.[157] Gerrard Winstanley, the leader of the more extreme Diggers, stated “the best lawes that England hath, [viz., the Magna Carta] were got by our Forefathers importunate petitioning unto the kings that still were their Task-masters; and yet these best laws are yoaks and manicles, tying one sort of people to be slaves to another; Clergy and Gentry have got their freedom, but the common people still are, and have been left servants to work for them.”[158][159]

Glorious Revolution[edit]

1733 engraving of the Charter of 1215 by John Pine

The first attempt at a proper Historiography was undertaken by Robert Brady[160] who refuted the supposed antiquity of parliament and the belief in the immutable continuity of the law, and realised the liberties of the Charter were limited and were effective only because it was the grant of the King; by putting Magna Carta in historical context he questioned its contemporary political relevance.[161] However, Brady's history would not survive the Glorious Revolution, which “...marked a setback for the course of English historiography.”[162]

The Glorious Revolution reinforced the century's ideological interpretations of history, which would later become known as the Whig interpretation of history. Reinforced with Lockean concepts the Whigs believed England's constitution to be a social contract, based on documents such as Magna Carta, the Petition of Right and The Bill of Rights.[163] Ideas about the nature of law in general were beginning to change. In 1716 the Septennial Act was passed, which had a number of consequences. Firstly, it showed that Parliament no longer considered its previous statutes unassailable, as this act provided that the parliamentary term was seven years, whereas fewer than twenty-five years had passed since the Triennial Act (1694), which provided that a parliamentary term was three years.[clarification needed] It also greatly extended the powers of Parliament. Under this new constitution Monarchical absolutism was replaced by Parliamentary supremacy. It was quickly realised that Magna Carta stood in the same relation to the King-in-Parliament as it had to the King without Parliament. This supremacy would be challenged by the likes of Granville Sharp. Sharp regarded Magna Carta to be a fundamental part of the constitution, and that it would be treason to repeal any part of it. Sharp also held that the Charter prohibited slavery.[164]

Sir William Blackstone published a critical edition of the 1215 Charter in 1759, and gave it the numbering system still used today.[165] In 1763 an MP, John Wilkes, was arrested for writing an inflammatory pamphlet, No. 45, 23 April 1763; he cited Magna Carta incessantly.[166] Lord Camden denounced the treatment of Wilkes as a contravention of Magna Carta.[167] Prophet of a new revolutionary age, Thomas Paine in his Rights of Man would disregard Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights on the grounds they were not a written constitution devised by elected representatives.[168]

Use in North America[edit]

Magna Carta replica and display in the rotunda of the United States Capitol, Washington, DC

When Englishmen left their homeland for the new world, they brought with them charters establishing the colonies. The Massachusetts Bay Company charter for example stated the colonists would "have and enjoy all liberties and immunities of free and natural subjects."[169] The Virginia Charter of 1606 (which was largely drafted by Sir Edward Coke) stated the colonists would have all "liberties, franchises and immunities" as if they had been born in England.[170] The Massachusetts Body of Liberties contained similarities to clause 29 of Magna Carta, and the Massachusetts General Court in drawing it up viewed Magna Carta as the chief embodiment of English common law.[171] The other colonies would follow their example. In 1638 Maryland sought to recognise Magna Carta as part of the law of the province but it was not granted by the King.[172]

In 1687 William Penn published The Excellent Privilege of Liberty and Property: being the birth-right of the Free-Born Subjects of England, which contained the first copy of Magna Carta printed on American soil. Penn's comments reflected Coke's, indicating a belief that Magna Carta was a fundamental law.[173] The colonists drew on English lawbooks leading them to an anachronistic interpretation of Magna Carta, believing it guaranteed trial by jury and habeas corpus.[174]

The development of Parliamentary sovereignty in the British Isles did not constitutionally affect the Thirteen Colonies, which retained an adherence to English common law, but it would come to directly affect the relationship between Britain and the colonies.[175] When American colonists raised arms against Britain, they were fighting not so much for new freedom, but to preserve liberties and rights, as believed to be enshrined in Magna Carta and as later included in the Bill of Rights.[176]

The American Constitution is the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in which Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law.[177] In comparing Magna Carta with the Bill of Rights: the Fifth Amendment guarantees: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."[178] In addition, the United States Constitution included a similar writ in the Suspension Clause, article 1, section 9: "The privilege of the writ habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."[179] Each of these proclaim no person may be imprisoned or detained without proof that he or she did wrong. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The framers of the United States Constitution wished to ensure that rights they already held, such as those provided by Magna Carta, were not lost unless explicitly curtailed in the new United States Constitution.[180][181]

The Supreme Court of the United States has explicitly referenced Lord Coke's analysis of Magna Carta as an antecedent of the Sixth Amendment's right to a speedy trial.[182]

19th - 21st centuries[edit]

Interpretation[edit]

Romanticised 19th-century recreation of King John signing Magna Carta

Initially the Whig interpretation of Magna Carta and its role in constitutional history remained dominant during in the 19th century. The historian William Stubbs's Constitutional History of England, published in the 1870s, formed the high-water mark of this approach.[183] Stubbs argued that Magna Carta had been a major step in the shaping of the English people as a nation, and he believed that the barons at Runnymede in 1215 were not just representing the nobility, but the people of England as a whole, standing up to a tyrannical ruler in the form of John.[183][184]

This view of Magna Carta, however, began to pass. The late-Victorian jurist and historian Frederic William Maitland provided an alternative academic history in 1899, which began to move Magna Carta from the myth that had grown up around it, back to its historical roots as a 13th-century document.[185] In 1904 Edward Jenks published an article entitled The Myth of Magna Carta, which undermined the traditionally accepted view of Magna Carta.[186] Historians such as Albert Pollard agreed with Jenks in concluding that the jurist Edward Coke had largely "invented" the myth of Magna Carta in the 17th century, arguing that the 1215 charter had not referred to liberty for the people at large, but rather to the protection of baronial rights.[187] This view also became popular fashionable in wider circles, and in 1930 Sellar and Yeatman published their parody on English history, 1066 and All That, playing on the supposed importance of Magna Carta and its promises of universal liberty, noting that "Magna Charter was therefore the chief cause of Democracy in England, and thus a Good Thing for everyone (except the Common People)".[188][189]

In many literary representations of the medieval past, however, Magna Carta remained the foundation for the many diverse constructions of English national identity. Some authors used the medieval roots of the document as an argument to preserve the social status quo, while others pointed to Magna Carta to challenge perceived economic injustices.[185] The Baronial Order of Magna Charta was formed in 1898 to promote the ancient principles and values felt to be displayed in Magna Carta.[190] The legal profession in England and the United States continued to hold Magna Carta in high esteem; they were instrumental in forming the Magna Carta Society in 1922 to protect the meadows at Runnymede from development in the 1920s, and in 1957, the American Bar Association erected the Magna Carta Memorial at Runnymede.[191][192][193] The prominent lawyer Lord Denning described it in 1956 as "the greatest constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot".[1]

Repeal of articles and constitutional influence[edit]

Whilst radicals such as Sir Francis Burdett believed that Magna Carta could not be repealed,[194] the 19th century would see the beginning of the repeal of many of the clauses of Magna Carta. The clauses were either obsolete and/or had been replaced by later legislation. The repeal of clause 26 in 1829, by the Offences against the Person Act 1828 (9 Geo. 4 c. 31 s. 1),[195] was the first time a clause of Magna Carta was repealed. With the document's perceived inviolability broken, in the next 140 years nearly the whole charter was repealed,[196] leaving just Clauses 1, 9, and 29 still in force after 1969. Most of it was repealed in England and Wales by the Statute Law Revision Act 1863, and in Ireland by the Statute Law (Ireland) Revision Act 1872.[195]

Many later attempts to draft constitutional forms of government trace their lineage back to Magna Carta. The British dominions, Australia and New Zealand,[197] Canada[198] (except Quebec), and formerly Union of South Africa and Southern Rhodesia, reflected influence of Magna Carta in their law, and the Charter impacted generally on the states that evolved from the British Empire.[199]

Modern legacy[edit]

The Magna Carta Memorial at Runnymede erected by the American Bar Association in 1957

Magna Carta continues to have a powerful iconic status in British society, being cited by both policians and lawyers in support of constitutional positions.[1][200] Its perceived guarantee of trial by jury and other civil liberties, for example, led to Tony Benn referring to the debate over whether to increase the maximum time terrorist suspects could be held without charge from 28 to 42 days as "the day Magna Carta was repealed".[201] In many ways still a "sacred text", Magna Carta is generally considered part of the uncodified constitution of the United Kingdom and in a 2005 speech, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Lord Woolf, described it as the "first of a series of instruments that now are recognised as having a special constitutional status".[202][203]

Magna Carta carries little legal weight in modern Britain, as most of its clauses have been repealed and relevant rights ensured by other statutes, but the historian James Holt remarks that the survival of the 1215 charter in national life is a "reflexion of the continuous development of English law and administration" and symbolic of the many struggles between authority and the law over the centuries.[204] The historian W. L. Warren has observed that "many who knew little and cared less about the content of the Charter have, in nearly all ages, invoked its name, and with good cause, for it meant more than it said".[205] It also remains a topic of great interest to historians, Natalie Fryde characterising the charter as "one of the holiest of cows in English medieval history", with the debates over its interpretation and meaning unlikely to ever be ever fully concluded.[184]

The document also continues to be honoured in the United States as an antecedent of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.[206] In 1976, the UK lent one of four surviving originals of the 1215 Magna Carta to the United States for their bicentennial celebrations and also donated an ornate case to display it. The original was returned after one year, but a replica and its case are still on display in the United States Capitol Crypt in Washington, D.C.[207]

Celebration of the 800th anniversary[edit]

The plan for four surviving original copies of Magna Carta to be brought together in 2015, at the British Library in collaboration with Lincoln Cathedral and Salisbury Cathedral and supported by the law firm Linklaters.

The 800th anniversary of the original charter will occur on 15 June 2015 and various organisations and institutions are planning celebratory events.[208] The British Library will be bringing together the four existing copies of the 1215 manuscript on 3 February 2015[209] and holding a special exhibition.[210] The copy held by Lincoln Cathedral will be in the Law Library of Congress in Washington DC from November 2014 until January 2015. A new visitor centre at Lincoln Castle will also be opened for the anniversary.[211]

Content[edit]

Physical design[edit]

Numerous copies, known as exemplifications, exist of the various charters, many of which still survive.[212] The charters were all written by hand using quill pens on sheets of vellum parchment, made from sheep skin, approximately 15 by 20 inches (380 by 510 mm) across.[213][214] The documents were written in abbreviated Latin in clear handwriting, and were sealed with the royal great seal by an official called the spirurnel, equipped with a special seal press, using beeswax and resin.[215][214] There were no signatures on the charter, and the barons present did not attach their own seals to it.[216] The charters were not numbered or divided into paragraphs or separate clauses at the time, as the numbering system used today was first introduced by Sir William Blackstone in 1759.[165]

Exemplifications[edit]

1215 exemplifications[edit]

1297 copy of Magna Carta, owned by the Australian Government and on display in the Members' Hall of Parliament House, Canberra.

At least 13 original copies of the 1215 charter were issued by the royal chancery at the time, seven in the first tranche distributed on 24 June and another six later; they were sent to county sheriffs and bishops, who would probably have been charged for the privilege.[217] Variations would have existed between each of these copies and there was probably no single "master copy".[218] Of these documents, only four now survive, all held in the UK — two in the British Library, one by Lincoln Cathedral and one in Salisbury Cathedral.[219] Each of these versions is slightly different in size and text, and are considered to be equally authoritative by historians.[220]

The two 1215 charters held by the British Library, known as Cotton MS. Augustus II.106 and Cotton Charter XIII.31a, were acquired by the antiquarian Sir Robert Cotton in the 17th century.[221] One of these was originally found by Humphrey Wyems, a London lawyer, who may have discovered it in a tailor's shop.[222] The other was found in Dover Castle in 1630 by Sir Edward Dering, and was probably the copy originally sent to the Cinque Ports in 1215.[223] This copy was badly damaged in a fire in Ashburnham House in 1731, however, and is largely illegible; although it is the only surviving 1215 copy to still have its great seal attached, this was badly melted in the heat.[224][225]

Lincoln Cathedral's original copy of the 1215 charter has been held by the county since 1215, being displayed in the Common Chamber in the cathedral, before being moved outside to another building in 1846.[226][219] It was being displayed at the World Fair in New York when the Second World War broke out, and spent the majority of the war in Fort Knox for safety before its return to the UK.[226] In 1976 it was put on display as part of the cathedral's medieval library.[226] It was subsequently displayed in San Francisco, and was taken out of display for a time to undergo conservation in preparation for another visit to the United States, where it was exhibited in 2007 at the Contemporary Art Center of Virginia and the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.[226][227][228] The document returned to New York to be displayed at the Fraunces Tavern Museum during 2009.[229]

The final copy, owned by Salisbury Cathedral, was first given to Old Sarum in 1215, which was the original cathedral in the region.[230] It has remained in Salisbury throughout its history, except when being taken off-site for restoration work.[231] It is possibly the best preserved of the four, although small pin holes can be seen in the parchment from where it was once pinned up.[231][232][233]

Later exemplifications[edit]

1225 charter, held in the British Library

Other early versions of Magna Carta survive. Durham Cathedral possesses 1216, 1217, and 1225 copies.[234]

A near-perfect 1217 copy is held by Hereford Cathedral and is occasionally displayed alongside the Mappa Mundi in the cathedral's chained library. Remarkably, the Hereford Magna Carta is the only one known to survive along with an early version of a Magna Carta 'user’s manual', a small document that was sent along with Magna Carta telling the Sheriff of the county to observe the conditions outlined in the document.[235]

Four copies are held by the Bodleian Library in Oxford. Three of these are 1217 issues and one a 1225 issue. On 10 December 2007, these were put on public display for the first time.[236] One of the Bodleian exemplifications from 1217 (once possibly held by Gloucester Cathedral) was displayed at San Francisco's California Palace of the Legion of Honor 7 May – 6 June 2011.[237]

In 1952 the Australian Government purchased a 1297 copy of Magna Carta for £12,500 from King's School, Bruton, England.[238] This copy is now on display in the Members' Hall of Parliament House, Canberra. In January 2006, it was announced by the Department of Parliamentary Services that the document had been revalued down from A$40m to A$15m.[239]

Only one copy (a 1297 copy in cursiva anglicana handwriting with the royal seal of Edward I) is in private hands. It was held by the Brudenell family, earls of Cardigan, who owned it for five centuries before they sold it to the Perot Foundation in 1984. This copy, having been on long-term loan to the US National Archives, was auctioned at Sotheby's New York on 18 December 2007. The Perot Foundation sold it to "...have funds available for medical research, for improving public education and for assisting wounded soldiers and their families."[240] It fetched US$21.3 million.[241] It was bought by businessman David Rubenstein[242] who after the auction said, "I thought it was very important that the Magna Carta stay in the United States and I was concerned that the only copy in the United States might escape as a result of this auction."[243] Rubenstein's copy is on permanent loan to the National Archives in Washington, D.C.[244]

The Rubenstein Magna Carta was removed from display on 2 March 2011 for conservation treatment and re-encasement in an anoxic environment provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency responsible for the 1950s encasement of the Charters of Freedom. After treatment and encasement by National Archives conservators, Magna Carta was put back on display for the public on 17 February 2012.[245]

Clauses[edit]

A photograph of the "heads" side of a silver coin
A silver King John penny; much of Magna Carta concerned how royal revenues were raised

Most of the 1215 charter and later versions sought to govern the feudal rights of the Crown over the barons.[246] Under the Angevin kings, and in particular during John's reign, the rights of the king had frequently been used inconsistently, often in an attempt to maximise the royal income from the barons. Feudal relief was one way that a king could demand money, and clauses 2 and 3 fixed the fees payable when an heir inherited an estate or when a minor came of age and took possession of their lands.[246] Scutage was a form of medieval taxation; all knights and nobles owed military service to the Crown in return for their lands, which theoretically belonged to the king, but many preferred to avoid this service and offer money instead, which was attractive to the Crown as the cash could be used to pay for mercenaries instead.[247] The rate of scutage that should be payable, and the circumstances it was appropriate for the king to demand it, was uncertain and controversial, and clauses 12 and 14 addressed the management of the process.[246]

The English judicial system had altered considerably over the previous century, with the royal judges playing a larger role in delivering justice across the country. John had used his royal discretion to extort large sums of money from the barons, effectively taking payment to offer justice in particular cases, and the role of the Crown in delivering justice had become politically sensitive among the barons. Clauses 39 and 40 demanded due process be applied in the royal justice system, while clause 45 required that the king only appoint suitable knowledgeable royal officials to the relevant role.[248] Although these did not have any special significance in the original charter, this part of Magna Carta became singled out as particularly important in later centuries.[248] In the United States, for example, the Supreme Court of California interpreted clause 45 in 1974 as establishing a requirement at common law that a defendant faced with the potential of incarceration is entitled to a trial overseen by a legally trained judge.[249]

King John holding a church, painted c.1250-59 by Matthew Paris

Royal forests were economically important in medieval England and were both protected and exploited by the Crown, supplying the king with hunting grounds, raw materials and money.[250][251] They were subject to special royal jurisdiction and the resulting forest law was, according to the historian Richard Huscroft, "harsh and arbitrary, a matter purely for the King's will".[250] The size of the forests had expanded under the Angevin kings, an unpopular development.[252] The 1215 charter had several clauses relating to the royal forests; clauses 47 and 48 promised to deforest the lands added to the forests under John and investigate the use of royal rights in this area, but notably did not address the forestation of the previous kings, while clause 53 promised some form of redress for those affected by the recent changes, and clause 44 promised some relief from the operation of the forest courts.[253] Neither Magna Carta nor the subsequent Charter of the Forest proved entirely satisfactory as a way of managing the political tensions around the operation of the royal forests.[253]

Some of the clauses addressed wider economic issues. The role of Jewish moneylenders, who occupied a special position in medieval England and were by tradition under the King's protection, and the concerns of the barons over the treatment of their debts with them, was addressed by clauses 10 and 11.[254] The charter concludes this section with the phrase "debts owing to other than Jews shall be dealt with likewise", so it is debatable to what extent the Jews were being singled out by these clauses.[255] Some issues were relatively specific, such as clause 33 which ordered the removal of all fish farms from England's rivers — an important and growing source of revenue at the time.[253]

The role of the English Church had been a matter for great debate in the years prior to the 1215 charter. The Norman and Angevin kings had traditionally exercised a great deal of power over the church within their territories. From the 1040s onwards, however, successive popes had put forward a reforming message that emphasised the importance of the church being governed more effectively from Rome, and who established an independent judicial system and hierarchical chain of authority.[256] After the 1140s, these principles had been largely accepted within the English church, albeit with an element of concern about centralising authority in Rome.[257] [258] These changes brought the customary rights of lay rulers such as John over ecclesiastical appointments into question.[257] As described above, John had come to a compromise with Pope Innocent III in exchange for his political support for the King, and clause 1 of Magna Carta prominently displayed this, promising the freedoms and liberties of the church.[246] The importance of this clause may also reflect the role of Archbishop Langton in the negotiations: Langton had taken a strong line on this issue during his career.[246]

Clauses in detail[edit]

Clauses remaining in UK law[edit]

Only three clauses of Magna Carta still remain on statute in the UK.[200] These concern the freedom of the English Church, the "ancient liberties" of the City of London and a right to due legal process, and stem from the decision in 1297 to copy the 1225 charter onto the statute roll.[200] In detail, these clauses state that:

  • 1. FIRST, We have granted to God, and by this our present Charter have confirmed, for Us and our Heirs for ever, that the Church of England shall be free, and shall have all her whole Rights and Liberties inviolable. We have granted also, and given to all the Freemen of our Realm, for Us and our Heirs for ever, these Liberties under-written, to have and to hold to them and their Heirs, of Us and our Heirs for ever.
  • 13. THE City of London shall have all the old Liberties and Customs which it hath been used to have. Moreover We will and grant, that all other Cities, Boroughs, Towns, and the Barons of the Five Ports, as with all other Ports, shall have all their Liberties and free Customs.
  • 39. NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.[195]


Usage of the definite article and spelling[edit]

Since there is no direct, consistent correlate of the English definite article in Latin, the usual academic convention is to refer to the document in English without the article as "Magna Carta" rather than "the Magna Carta". According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first written appearance of the term was in 1218: "Concesserimus libertates quasdam scripts in magna carta nostra de libertatibus" (Latin: "We shall have conceded certain liberties here written in our great charter concerning liberties").[264] However, "the Magna Carta" is frequently used in both academic and non-academic speech.

Especially in the past, the document has also been referred to as "Magna Charta", but the pronunciation was the same. "Magna Charta" is still an acceptable variant spelling recorded in many dictionaries due to continued use in some reputable sources. From the 13th to the 17th centuries, only the spelling "Magna Carta" was used. The spelling "Magna Charta" began to be used in the 18th century but never became more common despite also being used by some reputable writers.[265]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Within this article dates before 14 September 1752 are in the Julian calendar, later dates are in the Gregorian calendar.
  2. ^ The Runnymede Charter of Liberties did not apply to Chester, which at the time was a separate feudal domain. Earl Ranulf granted his own Magna Carta.[31] Some of its articles were similar to the Runnymede Charter.[32]
  3. ^ Among the historians to have discussed the "myth" of Magna Carta and the ancient English constitution are Claire Breay, Geoffrey Hindley, James Holt, John Pocock, Danny Danziger and John Gillingham.;[130][131][132][133] [134]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c Danziger & Gillingham 2004, p. 278.
  2. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 8.
  3. ^ a b c Turner 2009, p. 149.
  4. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 7.
  5. ^ Turner 2009, p. 139.
  6. ^ Warren 1991, p. 181.
  7. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 6-7.
  8. ^ a b Carpenter 1990, p. 9.
  9. ^ a b Turner 2009, p. 174.
  10. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, pp. 256-258.
  11. ^ McGlynn 2013, pp. 131-132.
  12. ^ McGlynn 2013, p. 130.
  13. ^ a b Turner 2009, p. 178.
  14. ^ a b McGlynn 2013, p. 132.
  15. ^ Holt 1992a, p. 115.
  16. ^ Poole 1993, pp. 471-472.
  17. ^ Turner 2009, p. 179.
  18. ^ Warren 1991, p. 233.
  19. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, pp. 258-259.
  20. ^ Turner 2009, pp. 174, 179-180.
  21. ^ a b c d Turner 2009, p. 180.
  22. ^ Holt 1992a, p. 112.
  23. ^ a b c McGlynn 2013, p. 137.
  24. ^ a b c Warren 1991, p. 236.
  25. ^ Turner 2009, p. 180, 182.
  26. ^ McGlynn 2013, p. 1307.
  27. ^ a b Turner 2009, p. 182.
  28. ^ Turner 2009, p. 184-185.
  29. ^ a b Turner 2009, p. 189.
  30. ^ Goodman 1995, p. 260.
  31. ^ Hewit 1929, p. 9.
  32. ^ Holt 1992b, pp. 379-380.
  33. ^ Poole 1993, p. 479.
  34. ^ Turner 2009, p. 189-190.
  35. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, p. 262.
  36. ^ a b c d Carpenter 1990, p. 12.
  37. ^ a b Turner 2009, p. 190.
  38. ^ Holt 1992a, p. 1.
  39. ^ Crouch 1996, p. 114.
  40. ^ Carpenter 2004, pp. 264-267.
  41. ^ Warren 1991, pp. 254–255
  42. ^ "The Magna Charta Barons at Runnymede". Brookfield Ancestor Project. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  43. ^ "Magna Carta Translation". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  44. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 14-15.
  45. ^ a b c d Carpenter 1990, p. 13.
  46. ^ McGlynn 2013, p. 189.
  47. ^ a b c d e Ridgeway 2004.
  48. ^ Weiler 2012, p. 1.
  49. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 1.
  50. ^ Mayr-Harting 2011, pp. 259–260.
  51. ^ Mayr-Harting 2011, p. 260.
  52. ^ Carpenter 2004, p. 301.
  53. ^ a b Carpenter 1990, pp. 19-21.
  54. ^ Aurell 2003, p. 30.
  55. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 21-22, 24-25.
  56. ^ Powicke 1963, p. 5.
  57. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 25.
  58. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 27.
  59. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 28-29.
  60. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 127-28.
  61. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 36-40.
  62. ^ McGlynn 2013, p. 216.
  63. ^ a b Hallam & Everard 2001, p. 173.
  64. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 41-42.
  65. ^ a b Carpenter 1990, p. 42.
  66. ^ a b Carpenter 1990, p. 44.
  67. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 41, 44-45.
  68. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 60.
  69. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 60-61.
  70. ^ a b Carpenter 1990, p. 61-62.
  71. ^ White 1915, pp. 472-475.
  72. ^ White 1917, pp. 545-555.
  73. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 402.
  74. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 333-335, 382-383.
  75. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 295-296.
  76. ^ Jobson 2012, p. 6.
  77. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 296-297.
  78. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 297.
  79. ^ Hallam & Everard 2001, p. 176.
  80. ^ Weiler 2012, p. 20.
  81. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 371–373.
  82. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 374–375.
  83. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 376, 378.
  84. ^ Hallam & Everard 2001, pp. 176–177.
  85. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 379.
  86. ^ a b Carpenter 2004, p. 307.
  87. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 383.
  88. ^ Carpenter 1990, pp. 2–3, 383, 386Carpenter 2004, p. 307
  89. ^ a b Clanchy 1997, p. 147.
  90. ^ a b Davis 2013, p. 71.
  91. ^ Davis 2013, p. 174.
  92. ^ a b Carpenter 1996, pp. 76, 99.
  93. ^ Carpenter 1990, p. 3.
  94. ^ Carpenter 1996, pp. 26, 29, 37, 43.
  95. ^ a b Carpenter 1996, p. 105.
  96. ^ Davis 2013, pp. 195-197.
  97. ^ Jobson 2012, p. 104.
  98. ^ Davis 2013, p. 224.
  99. ^ Jobson 2012, p. 163.
  100. ^ a b Prestwich 1997, p. 427.
  101. ^ Halsbury Statutes Volume 10 4th edition (2007) p6
  102. ^ "Magna Carta (1297)". The National Archive. Retrieved 29 July 2010. 
  103. ^ "UK Statute Law". Statutelaw.gov.uk. Retrieved 30 August 2010. 
  104. ^ Edwards 1943.
  105. ^ Danby Pickering (ed.), Statutes at Large 25 Edw I, c.1. (Cambridge, 1726-1807), v1, p273-75
  106. ^ "Confirmatio Cartarum". britannia.com. Retrieved 30 November 2007. 
  107. ^ Tebbit, Norman (16 May 2014). "The smears against Nigel Farage – and the freedoms of Magna Carta". The Telegraph. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  108. ^ "The Magna Carta". Bury St Edmunds Magna Carta 800. Bury St. Edmunds Society. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  109. ^ Prestwich 1997, p. 434.
  110. ^ Menache 2003, p. 253.
  111. ^ Sandoz 2008.
  112. ^ Fritze & Robison 2002, pp. 34-35.
  113. ^ Prestwich 1997, pp. 547-548.
  114. ^ a b Turner 2003b, p. 123.
  115. ^ Thompson 1948, pp. 9-10.
  116. ^ Turner 2003a.
  117. ^ "800th anniversary of Magna Carta". Church of England General Synod. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  118. ^ "Magna Carta". Royal Family History. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  119. ^ Johnson, Ben. "The Origins of the Magna Carta". Historic UK. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  120. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 127.
  121. ^ a b Turner 2003b, p. 138.
  122. ^ Hindley 1990, pp. 185-187.
  123. ^ Hindley 1990, pp. 185-186.
  124. ^ a b c Hindley 1990, p. 188.
  125. ^ Thompson 1948, p. 146.
  126. ^ Warren 1991, p. 324.
  127. ^ Hindley 1990, p. 187.
  128. ^ Thompson 1948, pp. 147-149.
  129. ^ a b Turner 2003b, p. 140.
  130. ^ a b c d e Danziger & Gillingham 2004, p. 280.
  131. ^ Hindley 1990, p. 183.
  132. ^ a b c d e Breay 2010, p. 46.
  133. ^ Pocock 1987, p. 124.
  134. ^ Holt 1992b, p. 9.
  135. ^ Eele 2013, p. 20.
  136. ^ Thompson 1948, pp. 216-230.
  137. ^ Pocock 1987, p. 154.
  138. ^ Wright 1919, p. 72.
  139. ^ a b c Hindley 1990, pp. 188-189.
  140. ^ Pocock 1987.
  141. ^ Greenberg 2006, p. 148.
  142. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 148.
  143. ^ Holt 1992b, pp. 20-21.
  144. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 156.
  145. ^ a b Hindley 1990, p. 189.
  146. ^ Hindley 1990, pp. 189-190.
  147. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 157.
  148. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, pp. 280-281.
  149. ^ Russell 1990, p. 41.
  150. ^ Hindley 1990, p. 190.
  151. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, p. 271.
  152. ^ Woolwrych 2003, p. 66.
  153. ^ Magna Carta: a Precedent For Recent Constitutional Change, a speech by Harry Woolf, Baron Woolf, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, given on 15 June 2005 at Royal Holloway, University of London
  154. ^ Pocock 1987, p. 127.
  155. ^ Kewes 2006, p. 279.
  156. ^ Kewes 2006, p. 226.
  157. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, pp. 281-282.
  158. ^ Hill 2006, pp. 111-122.
  159. ^ Linebaugh 2009, p. 85.
  160. ^ Pocock 1987, pp. 182-228.
  161. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 165.
  162. ^ Pocock 1987, p. 228.
  163. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 170.
  164. ^ Linebaugh 2009, pp. 113-114.
  165. ^ a b Turner 2003b, pp. 67-68.
  166. ^ Fryde 2001, p. 207.
  167. ^ Goodrich, Chauncey A. "The Speeches of Lord Chatham". Classic Persuasion. 
  168. ^ "Lord Irvine of Lairg "The Spirit of Magna Carta Continues to Resonate in Modern Law*"". Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  169. ^ Brink, Robert J. (18 August 2014). "History on display: one lawyer’s musings on the Magna Carta". Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. Retrieved 20 November 2014. 
  170. ^ Howard 2008, p. 28.
  171. ^ Hazeltine 1917, p. 194.
  172. ^ Hazeltine 1917, p. 195.
  173. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 210.
  174. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 211.
  175. ^ Hazeltine 1917, pp. 183-184.
  176. ^ "Magna Carta and Its American Legacy". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  177. ^ "Magna Carta and Its American Legacy". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 20 November 2014. 
  178. ^ "The Magna Carta". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 20 November 2014. 
  179. ^ "Habeas Corpus". Free Dictionary. Retrieved 20 November 2014. 
  180. ^ Stimson 2004.
  181. ^ Black 1999, p. 10.
  182. ^ "',Klopfer v. North Carolina',, 386 U.S. 213 (1967)". Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. Retrieved 2 May 2010. 
  183. ^ a b Turner 2003b, pp. 199-200.
  184. ^ a b Fryde 2001, p. 1.
  185. ^ a b Simmons 1998, pp. 69-83.
  186. ^ Galef 1998, pp. 78-79.
  187. ^ Pollard 1912, pp. 31-32.
  188. ^ Barnes 2008, p. 23.
  189. ^ Danziger & Gillingham 2004, p. 283.
  190. ^ "Home". The Baronial Order of Magna Carta. Retrieved 19 November 2014. 
  191. ^ Wright 1990, p. 167.
  192. ^ Holt 1992b, p. 2-3.
  193. ^ "National Archives Featured Documents: Magna Carta". Archives.gov. Retrieved 30 August 2010. 
  194. ^ Burdett 1810, p. 41.
  195. ^ a b c "(Magna Carta) (1297) (c. 9)". UK Statute Law Database. Retrieved 2 September 2007. 
  196. ^ "Magna Carta". Segarmore Institute. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  197. ^ Clark 2000.
  198. ^ Kennedy 1922, p. 228.
  199. ^ Drew 2004, pp. pxvi-pxxiii.
  200. ^ a b c Breay 2010, p. 48.
  201. ^ "So will the revolution start in Haltemprice and Howden?". The Independent (UK). 14 June 2008. Retrieved 16 June 2008. 
  202. ^ Holt 1992b, p. 21.
  203. ^ "Magna Carta: a precedent for recent constitutional change". Judiciary of England and Wales Speeches. 15 June 2005. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  204. ^ Holt 1992b, p. 2.
  205. ^ Warren 1991, p. 240.
  206. ^ "United States Constitution Q + A". The Charters of Freedom. The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  207. ^ "Magna Carta Replica and Display". Architect of the Capitol. Retrieved 20 November 2014. 
  208. ^ Doward, Jamie (1 November 2014). "Magna Carta 800 years on: recognition at last for ‘England’s greatest export’". The Observer. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  209. ^ "Celebrating 800 years of Magna Carta". British Library. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  210. ^ "Magna Carta: Law, Liberty, Legacy". British Library. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  211. ^ "Magna Carta 800". Visit Lincoln. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  212. ^ Breay 2010, p. 37.
  213. ^ Breay 2010, pp. 37-38.
  214. ^ a b Hindley 1990, p. 143.
  215. ^ Breay 2010, p. 38-39.
  216. ^ Browning 1898, p. 50.
  217. ^ Breay 2010, pp. 34-35.
  218. ^ Breay 2010, p. 34.
  219. ^ a b Breay 2010, p. 35.
  220. ^ Breay 2010, pp. 34-36.
  221. ^ Breay 2010, pp. 35-36.
  222. ^ Breay 2010, p. 36.
  223. ^ Turner 2003b, p. 65.
  224. ^ Breay 2010, pp. 36-37.
  225. ^ Davis 1963, p. 36.
  226. ^ a b c d Knight, Alec (17 April 2004). "Magna Charta: Our Heritage and Yours". National Society Magna Charta Dames and Barons. Archived from the original on 28 September 2007. Retrieved 2 September 2007. 
  227. ^ "Magna Carta on Display Beginning 4 July " (Press release). National Constitution Center. 30 May 2007. Archived from the original on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 2 September 2007. 
  228. ^ "Magna Carta & Four Foundations of Freedom". Contemporary Art Center of Virginia. 2007. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  229. ^ Copy of Magna Carta Travels to New York in Style, The New York Times, 13 September 2009
  230. ^ Salisbury Cathedral (2013). "The Salisbury Connection". Retrieved 13 November 2014. 
  231. ^ a b Salisbury Cathedral (2013). "The Document". Retrieved 13 November 2014. 
  232. ^ Award for cathedral Magna Carta, BBC News Online, 4 August 2009
  233. ^ Salisbury Cathedral (2013). "Visiting Magna Carta". Retrieved 13 November 2014. 
  234. ^ Campbell, Sophie (16 September 2014). "Magna Carta: On the trail of the Great Charter". Telegraph. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  235. ^ "Magna Carta at Hereford Cathedral". BBC. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  236. ^ "Magna Carta pulls in the crowds". Bodleian Libraries. University of Oxford. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  237. ^ "The Magna Carta". Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco. Retrieved 7 November 2014. 
  238. ^ "Harry Evans "Bad King John and the Australian Constitution: Commemorating the 700th Anniversary of the 1297 Issue of Magna Carta*"". Papers on Parliament No. 31. Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  239. ^ Metherell, Mark (4 January 2006). "Rare Magna Carta copy not such a big deal after all". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  240. ^ Barron, James (25 September 2007). "Magna Carta is going on the auction block". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 December 2007. 
  241. ^ "Magna Carta copy fetches $24m". Sydney Morning Herald. 19 December 2007. Retrieved 19 December 2007. 
  242. ^ Edgers, Geoff. "Two Magna Cartas in D.C.". The Washington Post. Retrieved 4 November 2014. 
  243. ^ Kent, Julie (19 December 2007). "Magna Carta Sold at Auction for $21.3 Million". The Cleveland leader. Retrieved 19 November 2014. 
  244. ^ Howard 2008.
  245. ^ National Archives and Records Administration (12 February 2012). "New National Archives Video Short Documents 1297 Magna Carta Encasement Project: Magna Carta to Return to Public Display on February 17" (Press release). Archives.gov. 
  246. ^ a b c d e Breay 2010, p. 28.
  247. ^ Poole 1993, pp. 16-17.
  248. ^ a b Breay 2010, p. 29.
  249. ^ Gordon v. Justice Court, 12 Cal. 3d 323 (1974).
  250. ^ a b Huscroft 2005, p. 97.
  251. ^ Poole 1993, pp. 29-30.
  252. ^ Poole 1993, p. 29.
  253. ^ a b c Breay 2010, p. 32.
  254. ^ Poole 1993, pp. 353, 474.
  255. ^ Hillaby 2013, p. 23.
  256. ^ Huscroft 2005, p. 190.
  257. ^ a b Huscroft 2005, p. 189.
  258. ^ Turner 2009, p. 121.
  259. ^ a b c Breay 2010, pp. 49-54.
  260. ^ a b c "All clauses". The Magna Carta Project. University of East Anglia. Retrieved 9 November 2014. 
  261. ^ Sharples, Barry. "Magna Carta Liberatum (The Great Charter of Liberties) The First Great Charter of King Edward The First Granted October 12th 1297,". Retrieved 13 November 2014. 
  262. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag "Magna Carta (1297)". Uk Government. Retrieved 15 November 2014. 
  263. ^ a b Hindley 1990, p. 201.
  264. ^ "Magna Carta, n.". Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved 20 November 2014. (subscription required (help)). 
  265. ^ Garner, Bryan A. (1995). A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage. Oxford University Press. p. 541. ISBN 9780195142365. 

Bibliography[edit]

External links[edit]