10 hours ago
Magna Carta: What is this ‘blueprint for democracy' signed 800 years ago
Eight hundred and ten years ago, almost to the day, an English king agreed to a seminal document laying down principles that would help establish the foundations of modern democracies.
The Magna Carta (Latin for 'Great Charter') was signed on June 15, 1215, at Runnymede Meadows near London. English barons collectively sought to restrict King John's arbitrary orders and had him agree to several principles, most importantly that the king could only act under the law.
Last month, Harvard University discovered one of the earliest versions of the document in its collections, dating back to the year 1300, previously assumed to be a copy. 'Considered a key step in the evolution of human rights against oppressive rulers, Magna Carta has formed the basis of constitutions around the world,' Harvard Law School noted on May 15.
Seeds in anger against high taxes
The Magna Carta was sealed at a time when King John witnessed several military failures. In 1204, the King of France took Normandy and Anjou. To fund expeditions to take back those lands, John raised taxes on his subjects.
The more immediate cause of the barons' rebellion against King John was his defeat in the battle of Bouvines in 1214, at the hands of the King of France, Philip II Augustus.
In the medieval feudal structure, barons were granted varying sizes of land in exchange for their loyalty and services to the monarch, such as providing knights during wars. Such was the prevailing discontent against John's treatment of the barons and his insistence on launching wars despite constant defeats, that they refused support for the battle. He then allied with the German Holy Roman Emperor Otto and the Counts of Flanders and Boulogne, but lost.
Not accepted easily
English historian JC Holt wrote in his book Magna Carta (1965) that agreements for ceding some of the king's power after battle losses was not unusual, and many such documents were signed across Europe at that time.
Nonetheless, it was a significant moment, at a time when there existed no constitution, no defined power or rights in the political structure. It was a society 'in which privilege seemed to be part of the natural order of things', wrote Holt. 'From these primitive elements to a settled constitution was a long, tortuous and often bloody journey in which the grant of charters of liberties was but one, and that an early, step.'
The meeting in Runnymede resulted in a charter running into more than 3,500 words across 63 clauses. Some dealt with more local administrative issues, while others had universal applicability.
Clause 39, for instance, says, 'No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.' Clause 40 says, 'To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.'
Copies of Magna Carta were sent out to be read out in each county to popularise it.
Within three months, fearing the loss of his power, John sought to annul it with the help of Pope Innocent III. The barons then renounced their support and invited the son of the king of France to take the crown of England. By 1216, John's health had deteriorated, and he passed away. His remaining supporters decided to install his nine-year-old son on the throne. Henry III was crowned later that year, and letters were sent to the barons confirming the Magna Carta and calling for their loyalty.
Several versions of the document were reissued over the years. At present, four copies of the original have survived. A 1297 version of the Magna Carta sold at auction in 2007 for $21.3 million.
Lasting symbolism
A critical view of the charter is that it strictly dealt with the distribution of powers among the elite – the king and the barons. On its centenary in 2015, a BBC report said 'free men' mentioned in clause 39 accounted for less than half the population at the time. 'The rest were serfs, to whom the charter did not apply. And 'men' meant men — women, except for widows, merit barely a mention in Magna Carta,' it said. Its modern links to democracy are also debatable, as it wasn't aimed at actually democratising the political setup.
English historian David Carpenter, in an essay for The Guardian, wrote that despite these lacunae, the document still resulted in 'the most radical and detailed restrictions on the ruler' in Europe. That wasn't because of magnanimity on the king's part, but because he was 'uniquely demanding and intrusive' of his subjects, 'thanks to the pressures of maintaining a continental empire' that stretched to modern-day southern France.
He added that some of its clauses 'asserted a fundamental principle – the rule of law. The king was beneath the law, the law the Charter itself was making. He could no longer treat his subjects in an arbitrary fashion.' Today, clauses 39 and 40 are still on the UK statutes and are seen as the basis of concepts such as habeas corpus (guarding against arbitrary detention).
US National Archives note, 'During the American Revolution, Magna Carta served to inspire and justify action in liberty's defense. The colonists believed they were entitled to the same rights as Englishmen, rights guaranteed in Magna Carta. They embedded those rights into the laws of their states and later into the Constitution and Bill of Rights.'
Rather than the specific clauses, its representation as a symbol of modern democratic values is what has endured.
Rishika Singh is a Senior sub-editor at the Explained Desk of The Indian Express. She enjoys writing on issues related to international relations, and in particular, likes to follow analyses of news from China. Additionally, she writes on developments related to politics and culture in India.
... Read More
