Re: MT VOID, 06/06/25 -- Vol. 43, No. 49, Whole Number 2383

On 6/8/25 7:47 AM, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:

 But Jones's main point seems to be that our current perspective of
Magna Carta, and our idolization of it, is based on very shaky
ground.  Almost all of Magna Carta dealt with issues that have no
relevance today (whether peasants can let their pigs forage in the
forests, for example).  And Magna Carta itself was almost
immediately ignored by King John, with the Pope's approval (who
declared it null and void).  It was followed almost immediately by
the civil war it was intended to prevent.  Various clauses from it
did appear in future charters, but it effectively disappeared
from public discourse for four hundred years.  (Thomas More cites
it in A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, but whether he did in actuality is
not clear, and in any case, he was a lawyer.)  It started to
re-appear in the sixteenth century, and figured heavily in the
American Revolution.
 One might claim, I suppose, that it is often cited in the same way
as the Bible--by people who take pieces out of context and are
unfamiliar with the entirety.

There was a Robin Hood movie I saw where the Magna Carta is supposed to contain guarantees of rights to all the people, far beyond anything it actually said, and King John immediately tore it up (which also isn't historical).
When discussing it afterward, I suggested there was a first draft which he found unacceptable (and somehow escaped the notice of history), and he later signed a more limited one.
--
Gary McGath    http://www.mcgath.com