March 2, 2015
Bryan Garner: Magna Carta Style Guide
From the ABA Journal,
1st January 2015
Click here for the original article
The Library of Congress has staged a magnificent exhibit on Magna Carta and its history. It is, after all, the 800th anniversary of the Great Charter of 1215. To commemorate the event, Justice Randy J. Holland of the Delaware Supreme Court has edited a book to accompany the exhibit: Magna Carta: Muse and Mentor, for which Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has written a foreword. When Justice Holland asked me to contribute one of the 15 essays in the book, I decided to take a lexicographic look at the phrase. There are many curiosities about both the phrase Magna Carta and the document it denotes. Very little about Magna Carta is simple or straightforward.
What is the predominant spelling?
Originally, the predominant form was Magna Charta, which long held sway. At its height, Magna Charta was nearly 10 times as common as Magna Carta. But the two spellings had a significant reversal of fortune in the late 20th century.
In 1926, when H.W. Fowler wrote the first edition of his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, he said: “Magna C(h)arta. Authority seems to be for spelling charta and pronouncing /kar´ta/, which is hard on the plain man. But outside of histories and lecture rooms the spelling and pronunciation charta will take a great deal of killing yet.” In his 1965 revision of that book, Sir Ernest Gowers introduced an excellent update: “In a bill introduced in 1946 authorizing the trustees of the British Museum to lend a copy to the Library of Congress, Charta was the spelling used. But when the bill reached committee stage in the House of Lords, the lord chancellor (Lord Jowitt) moved to substitute Carta and produced conclusive evidence that that was traditionally the correct spelling. The amendment was carried without a division, so Carta has now unimpeachable authority.”
Though Charta vastly predominated before the mid-20th century, it now seems archaic. What an astonishingly swift reversal of linguistic fortune.
How are variant forms produced?
The phrase is pronounced the same regardless of spelling: /kahr´-tuh/. All the dictionaries that give a pronunciation record the Charta spelling as having a hard -k- sound, not a -ch- sound. The modern trend to spell the phrase Carta, not Charta, may have been in part because the cognoscenti realized that English speakers had started mispronouncing the term. (As Fowler said in 1926, the exceptional pronunciation was “hard on the plain man.”) After all, English speakers are notoriously prone to mistaken “spelling pronunciations,” as with comptroller and schism, so the reversion to the spelling Carta after a long period of Charta made sense if English speakers hoped to keep the traditional pronunciation intact. The frequent listing of the phrase in pronunciation books reinforces the idea that mispronunciations had become common during the mid-20th century.
Is it better to say Magna Carta or the Magna Carta?
All the usage guides [see editor’s note, right] prefer omitting the definite article before Magna Carta. The traditional reason for omitting the article is twofold: (1) the name is being used as a proper noun, and (2) in Latin the phrase doesn’t take an article, and early anglicizations followed the Latinate word pattern.
To which King should Magna Carta be credited?
To the nonhistorian, this is really odd. Most of the early dictionaries give the year 1225—the ninth year of King Henry III—as the year for Magna Carta. Dozens of English dictionaries say this, beginning with John Cowell in his law dictionary of 1607. How can this be?
The answer is that the 1225 version of Magna Carta is the one that became incorporated into British statute law. Here’s how the thorough 19th-century lexicographer Alexander Burrill explained it: “This charter of Henry III is the Great Charter—which is always referred to as the basis of the English constitution—the charter of John being only remembered as a monument of antiquity. The Charter of Henry is the oldest printed statute now extant in England. The original charter of John is still preserved in the British Museum.” King John’s Magna Carta was declared a nullity by the pope just a little over two months after it was sealed.
So the early legal lexicographers had reason to prefer citing the third reissue and crediting Henry III. But historians and schoolchildren alike care more today about the original 1215 date than 1225. That was the momentous year.
What is the precise date of King John’s Magna Carta?
Some dictionaries give the date as June 15, 1215. Others give June 19, 1215. This contradictory information counsels in favor of having lexicographers and encyclopedists avoid undue specificity. The Oxford English Dictionary, for example, says Magna Carta was “obtained from King John in 1215″ and leaves it at that. This may be a wise solution, since “the chroniclers give various dates to the settlement, ranging from 18 to 23 June.” Only one major dictionary—the now-defunct Funk & Wagnalls New Standard Dictionary of the English Language (1943)—gives an account that seems to reflect the most reliable modern research: “dated June 15, 1215, but actually sealed (not signed) and delivered June 19, 1215, by King John at Runnymede.” Except John probably did not seal the document either: That responsibility fell to a member of the Chancery staff. But June 19 seems to be the best guess for the document’s taking effect.
What did William Shakespeare and Samuel Johnson have to say about Magna Carta?
Nothing. Absolutely nothing. The various Shakespeare concordances have no listing of Magna Carta. Somehow Shakespeare’s play King John (1596) deals with baronial rebellion all the way through John’s death without a whisper about Magna Carta. As the variorum edition notes, the play contains “not the faintest allusion … to the constitutional struggle which ended in the grant of the Great Charter,” adding: “Startling as it sounds to modern ears, it is almost certain that Shakespeare had small knowledge of that document, and a very inadequate sense of its importance.” This despite the playwright’s extensive legal knowledge. Perhaps this paradox can be explained partly by the low ebb that Magna Carta had reached in the 15th and 16th centuries. Or the omission may have resulted from Shakespeare’s dramaturgical strategy, although some have suggested that King John is more subject to criticism by lawyers than any other play for precisely this reason. One historian of the English Renaissance doubts that Shakespeare had even heard of Magna Carta.
As for Samuel Johnson, his 1755 A Dictionary of the English Language has no entry for the phrase. Nor is there any reference to it in the entry for charter, although Johnson does say this: “Charters are divided into charters of the king, and charters of private persons.” Not until the Rev. H.J. Todd’s revision of 1818, more than 30 years after Johnson’s death, did an entry appear in an edition of Johnson’s dictionary. It read in full: “Magna Charta. n. s. [Latin.] The great charter of liberties granted to the people of England in the ninth year of Henry III, and confirmed by Edward I.”
Did Johnson discuss Magna Carta in any of the copious conversations recorded by his biographer James Boswell? Apparently not. No reference appears even in his voluminous letters.
Which Lexicographer most vividly depicted the scene at which Magna Carta took effect?
Giles Jacob in 1729, but the description wasn’t of King John at Runnymede; it was of Henry III late in life. It was the reaffirmation of Magna Carta in the 37th year of Henry III’s reign—a down-the-line reissue of the charter. The scene took place at “Westminster Hall. And in the presence of the nobility and bishops, with lighted candles in their hands, Magna Charta was read—the king all that while laying his hand on his breast, and at last solemnly swearing faithfully and inviolably to observe all the things therein contained, as he was a man, a Christian, a soldier and a king. Then the bishops extinguished the candles and threw them on the ground; and everyone said, ‘Thus let him be extinguished, and slink in hell, who violates this charter.
This article originally appeared in the January 2015 issue of the ABA Journal with this headline: “A Magna Carta Style Guide: From Charta to Carta and which king should get credit for the Great Charter. Click here to read the article in full.
February 24, 2015
Royal Holloway offers 20 Postgraduate scholarships as part of new Magna Carta Doctoral Centre
Royal Holloway, University of London
24th February 2015
‘Royal Holloway, University of London, will launch a new Magna Carta Doctoral Centre for Individual Freedom in 2015, after The Leverhulme Trust announced an award of more than £1 million to fund 15 postgraduate students – with the university offering a further five studentships.
The Leverhulme Doctoral Scholarships will fund multi-disciplinary research into the impact of digital technologies on personal liberty, addressing the global challenge of how to balance freedom, privacy and security, embracing the spirit and principles of the original Magna Carta but updated to reflect the very different society in which we now live.
As the UK marks the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, which was sealed in 1215 in Runnymede, just two miles from Royal Holloway, University of London’s campus in Egham, Surrey, the Centre will aim to examine and debate the legal, moral and technological dimensions associated with personal freedom in the digital age. The students will assess what can and can’t be done to preserve privacy and other freedoms using existing and emerging technology and will seek new technological solutions as appropriate. But this research will be undertaken with an equal emphasis on what is and what is not desirable from a social and moral perspective all within the constraints of what society can or should tolerate given the need for security and sustainability and the imperative of creating a new and credible legal framework.’
Magna Carta copy inspected by Queen
BBC News
23 February 2015
Magna Carta copy inspected by Queen
‘The Queen has inspected a modern copy of Magna Carta at a reception at Buckingham Palace to mark the document’s 800th anniversary.
The original charter attempted to limit the powers of her medieval ancestor, King John.
The copy is written on sheepskin parchment, like the original, and belongs to the British Library.
Her Majesty is patron of the Magna Carta Trust, which is holding events to commemorate the anniversary.
Dr Claire Breay, the British Library’s head of medieval manuscripts, said there were four remaining versions of the original manuscript still in existence.
This copy is made up of 3,500 words handwritten in minuscule medieval Latin.
Dr Breay, who showed it to the Queen, added: “There were 63 clauses in the original document and most of those have now been repealed, and of the version of Magna Carta which went on to the statute books only three clauses are still valid in English law on the statute book today.
“So I was showing the Queen the clause ‘no free man should be seized or imprisoned or stripped of his rights, or outlawed or exiled except by the judgement of his equals or by the law of the land and no one shall have justice delayed or denied to him’ because that is one of the clauses that is still on the statute book and is at the heart of its fame today.
She also added that the Queen had been “intrigued” to see a seal of King John, which will be part of an exhibition on the Magna Carta starting at the British Library next month.
The seal, on loan from Eton College, is one of the earliest and best-preserved images of the Plantagenet Kings.
Among the legal and political dignitaries attending the reception was Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, Lord Neuberger, the president of the Supreme Court and Sir Robert Worcester, founder of polling firm MORI and deputy chairman of the Magna Carta Trust.’
February 23, 2015
Ditchley Foundation: The future of democracy in the world: Magna Carta 800th anniversary
The following is the Director’s Note submitted after a conference at the Ditchley Foundation held on 29 – 31 January 2015, ‘The Future of Democracy in the World: Magna Carta’s 800th Anniversary.’ The conference assessed the role and the future of democracy today in light of the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta, the Great Charter of Liberties, in 1215.
This report can also be read on the Ditchley Foundation’s website here.
Introduction
The first conference of 2015 saw us commemorating the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta with a debate dedicated to the state of democracy today, and the challenges it faces for the future. We were very grateful for the support of the Magna Carta Trust 800th Committee. The warmth and vigour of the discussion belied the cold outside and, although we were rather better at identifying the problems than the solutions, there were some clear pointers to where progress most needed to be made. Wise chairmanship helped encourage us in the right direction. Although the history of Magna Carta was not our subject of debate, we kept coming back to its significance as a fundamental building block of even the most modern conceptions of democracy.
Summary
We were agreed that democracy, with its extraordinary success around the world in the last 60-70 years, remained the least worst form of government yet devised, and that no attractive alternatives to it had yet appeared. More authoritarian systems could appear better able to deliver results, particularly in the economic field, in the short term. But we were not convinced that such systems could endure and deliver over time, through bad times as well as good, still less satisfy their citizens’ aspirations for a say in how they were governed and the securing of their basic rights as citizens. We did not accept that some countries or peoples were not ready for, or unsuited to, democracy, or that religion was incompatible with democracy, despite current questioning of this in relation to Islam. However we did recognise that democracy was not necessarily destined to be the dominant form of government everywhere, that its success was increasingly questioned, and that some authoritarian regimes were pushing back.
We did not attempt a comprehensive definition of democracy, but identified some essential features, including the ability to vote to change governments regularly, the existence of fundamental freedoms of expression and association, and the rule of law. Democracy was best viewed as a continuum rather than a binary issue. Each democracy was both context-specific and dynamic. Each also contained the seeds of its own destruction through the potential election of a democracy-destroying party or individual. We struggled to agree on whether there were identical fundamental values in every democracy, and if so which, but did agree that democracy was the best way of securing and preserving basic human rights, despite variations in practice around the world.
We worried about problems facing established democracies, including apparent voter apathy, particularly among the young. The growing distance between politicians and voters was worrying. There was a disconnect between the digital world, where the younger generation felt at home, and traditional politics. Political parties were losing membership and credibility. Some participants questioned whether representative democracy could survive in its current form. New ways of engaging with the voters and increasing participation were urgently needed, particularly online.
Newer democracies and countries trying to transition to democracy were often more enthusiastic about the precious gift of the vote, and more innovative, but could also face more serious problems: elected dictatorships, corruption and trampling of basic rights. The lack of a strong civil society was often a fundamental handicap, particularly where previous dictators had deliberately destroyed institutions and traditional sources of influence.
In all cases the survival of democracy could not be taken for granted, and needed to be protected through active promotion of its virtues, within countries and internationally. It was important that there were international standards against which countries could be measured, and that international organisations should uphold these. We struggled more with the concept of international intervention to protect or restore democracy. Peaceful means of pressure were not controversial, but views were divided about whether military intervention could ever be justified. We also looked at the tricky relationship between democracy and the nation state and nationalism. Which regions could or should have the right to secede?
We had no neat solutions for these problems, but a number of recommendations and pointers for the future emerged clearly from our discussions, and are listed. Our overall conclusion was that democracy faces some serious challenges but is vital to all our futures, and is worth the struggle. Losing it accidentally would be unforgiveable, as foundational documents like Magna Carta constantly remind us.
Main Note
Is democracy still the least worst form of government?
The answer to this question was a resounding yes. Whatever the problems faced by democracy in many parts of the world, it was still what most people from all backgrounds and cultures wanted, if they were given a choice. The spread of democracy since the end of the Second World War had been astonishing. Even the worst dictators now felt the need to give themselves some democratic trappings. People were not wedded to particular models of democracy (and the distinction between Western and other forms of democracy was ultimately a false one), but they valued and craved freedom, and the ability to have a say in who ruled them and how, underpinned by respect for fundamental human rights and values, and institutions like an independent judiciary. More authoritarian systems might be able to deliver faster economic growth and decision-making in certain circumstances, as China in particular had shown. But they were not capable of engaging and satisfying people in the longer term, through bad times as well as good. Truly benevolent dictators were few and far between, if they existed at all — and you could not choose or fine-tune your dictator. There was also a link between open democratic societies and the opportunity and desire to exercise entrepreneurial skills, and therefore economic success, which we should not ignore.
Acceptable alternatives to democracy as we currently knew it had not so far emerged in any recognisable form. Attempts to claim that there were alternative value systems to those which underpinned democracy, such as “Asian values” or “Islamic values”, had so far proved little more than efforts to justify more authoritarian rule in one form or another.
Similarly, while resistance in other parts of the world to a system which could be seen as “western”, or even “colonial”, in origin, was understandable, claiming that such a system was not appropriate for a particular country or region had not proved credible. The ideas of consultative forms of government and individual rights were in any case not exclusively western, as the Ashokan pillars in India reminded us. Most participants rejected the view that some countries or peoples could somehow be seen as “not ready” for or “not suited” to democracy. While education and prosperity undoubtedly helped to allow desire for democracy to grow, the poor and uneducated were also quite capable of understanding what freedom meant and fighting for it, as we had seen in countries like India and Bangladesh and in parts of Africa. We did not accept that some groups, such as Russians, would necessarily always want or need a “strong man” to lead them. This was just a convenient myth.
On the negative side, we had to recognise that the automatic assumption prevalent in the western world for the past 60 or 70 years, that democracy would ultimately spread everywhere, was now under serious challenge from some authoritarian regimes around the world, even in Europe itself. Democracy was not destiny, and had to be defended and fought for. Within democracies too, even established ones, there were some major challenges. Old verities had gone, and the new ones were not yet in place.
We had some debate about whether democracy and Islam were easily compatible, given the view of many Muslims that religion and state could not be separated, and that their religion and its tenets should trump human rights in some areas, for example the place of women in society, or tolerance of some areas of freedom of expression. The majority did not accept that there was any fundamental incompatibility, pointing to cases like Indonesia and Malaysia, and up to a point Turkey, to demonstrate this. But there was a debate to be had. This issue is explored further elsewhere in this Note.
Can the people be trusted?
This was an interesting discussion. The obvious answer was yes — there was no realistic alternative to trusting the people. However many participants made the point that democracy contained the seeds of its own destruction, in that people in a particular country might well vote at some point for an individual or party who would subsequently abolish democracy. Germany in the 1930s was a dramatic example from the past, and there were plenty of current examples of leaders who were apparently popular and who won elections which looked legitimate, at least on the surface, but whose commitment to democracy was suspect, to put it no higher. Questions had for example been asked about the commitment to democracy of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt — would the Morsi government inevitably have been one man, one vote, once? The subsequent military coup meant that we did not know the final answer in the Egyptian case, though the Brotherhood in Tunisia had behaved democratically so far.
A more subtle threat came from majoritarianism — the ability of the majority to oppress the minority or minorities. It was hard to avoid this risk entirely — some minorities, however defined, would always resent the ability of the majority to impose their view. But this pointed to the necessity of accompanying fair electoral systems with other devices designed to ensure fairness and protection of basic rights — written constitutions, independent judiciaries, Bills of Rights etc. — and with agreed values. Strong civil society was another essential way of ensuring checks and balances in any particular system. Devolution and decentralisation of power could also be extremely valuable in guarding against “winner takes all” attitudes and outcomes.
What is democracy?
Questions like these inevitably brought us back to the basic issues of how to define democracy. We tried to avoid disappearing too far down this particular rabbit-hole, which could have derailed the whole conference. We were agreed that there was not, and could not be, a universally accepted and completely satisfactory definition of democracy. Even among the established mature democracies, there were great variations of policy and practice, and even of principle in some areas. Each democracy was society-specific, and also constantly changing its own dynamics. Moreover whether a particular country was democratic or not was not a binary question. Instead there was a continuum, and the question was how far along it in any particular direction individual countries should be placed.
At the same time, there were certain essential features of any system which aspired to be democratic, including:
– The ability of the people to change their governments peacefully, at regular and reasonably frequent intervals.
– Freedom of expression.
– Freedom of association.
– Freedom of individuals to be candidates for elected office.
– Equality before the law, and rule of law (assuming the law itself was democratically devised and protected).
We struggled with the extent to which democracies had to have shared value systems within themselves, or between themselves and other democracies. For example which human rights should be regarded as fundamental to any democracy? The UK of the 1930s, once universal suffrage had been achieved, was basically democratic, but laws were in force then, such as the illegality of homosexuality, which, while supported by public opinion at the time, would be regarded as undemocratic by most Britons today. Many countries around the world, with many of the attributes of democracy, still repressed and oppressed gay people and indeed women. This suggested that it was difficult to lay down hard and fast rules about particular values, whose absence, or the absence of means to enforce them, would make a country basically undemocratic. The continuum approach was valuable here. However this view was certainly not shared by all around the table. Some argued that societies where women and minorities were denied their rights simply could not be regarded as fully democratic. Universal values and rights were just that, universal, even if some were not (yet) universally accepted.
We also struggled with the relative importance for democratic status and promotion of democracy of processes, such as elections, and values. Our general conclusion was that this was a false choice. Values by themselves were insufficient if there were no effective institutional mechanisms to put them into daily practice. Processes were crucial but, in the absence of key essentials such as freedom of expression and association, were also clearly not enough to guarantee democracy. There were many countries round the world which held elections which were not, and could not be, genuinely free and fair, even if an individual electoral result might appear to outside observers to conform to the popular will.
The importance of voting
While we agreed that elections were certainly not enough by themselves to deliver genuine democracy, and thought that this point needed to be hammered home regularly, we also agreed that the vote under universal suffrage was not only essential but precious, and by no means guaranteed for ever, even in mature democracies. Many newer or emerging democracies had preserved this sense of preciousness, as shown both by consistently high turnout levels and the sense of civic pride and enjoyment in going into the ballot booth. Sadly some established democracies seemed to have lost it. Voting was not associated by younger generations with exercise of their fundamental rights or their civic duty, and turnout levels were declining worryingly in many mature democracies.
What solutions were available for this? Compulsory attendance at the voting stations, as in Australia or Belgium, seemed to have significant support around the table, although some pointed out the risk of perverse consequences if those who knew and cared least about the outcome of a vote nevertheless could have a big influence on the outcome. Making voting easier (more and more attractive physical places to do it, voting online etc.) was another obvious route. Paying people a small sum to vote could help in some cases. We also noted an interesting trend towards allowing the vote to 16 year olds and above, rather than the more normal starting age of 18. The arguments in favour were not only that 16 year olds were entitled to do many other things, and would be hugely affected by the results of elections, but also that if they were voting while still at school they could be more easily educated about why it was so important.
In this context we noted the risks of the old voting more than the young, as was increasingly the case in many established democracies. Politicians would naturally look to appeal to this grey vote, which could both further alienate the younger generations from the political process, and risk an unfair bias in the ways benefits and advantages were distributed.
Problems of established democracies
A significant part of the discussion was taken up by an enumeration of the ills of mature, “western” democracies. On the one hand we noted that these were mostly “first world” problems which did not yet threaten basic democratic rights and freedoms, and could hardly be compared to the more direct challenges to democracy in parts of the developing world. It could be argued that if people were not very interested in politics or elections, that meant they were basically reasonably happy with the system and its outcomes. On the other, there were fears that the trends were relentlessly negative; that if they continued, the threat to democracy as we knew it could become more actual; and that if the classic role models of democracy such as the UK, US and France began to falter, and lose confidence in themselves, this would be very bad for democratic campaigners, and indeed democracy, in the rest of the world.
Beyond the obvious problem of falling turn-out already noted, we identified the following mature democracy problems:
– Disillusion with the democratic process as unable to deliver results.
– A voter sentiment that the distance between them and their political masters was wide and widening further.
– A voter view, at least partly driven by media coverage, that politicians were only in it for themselves, were all the same and did not keep their promises.
– A feeling among some that western democracies could no longer deliver economic success, as they had done for so long, because the accompanying capitalist model was broken.
– A disconnect between the current democratic process and the digital communication age.
– Loss of membership and credibility by political parties.
– Unhealthy role of money in elections (above all in the US).
– Deepening economic and social inequality, which appeared hard to square with democracy.
– The rise of a professional political class with little or no other experience of life, creating even greater distance of politicians from voters.
– Debased use of language by politicians: clichés and “borrowed words” which failed to connect with, or inspire, voters.
– The rise of populist parties and politicians.
– The sentiment among some voters that politicians were not the ones who held real power, and that those who did were not accountable.
– Voting systems where parties came into government with only a relatively small proportion of the popular vote, or the results of only a few constituencies really mattered to the final outcome.
Fundamental linked factors behind many of these problems were the tendency of many politicians to over-promise and under-deliver, and the consequent tendency of many modern voters, despite their underlying disillusion, to have exaggerated expectations of what politicians could do. The reality in a complex and globalised world was that national politicians had limited power to influence developments, even within their own countries, but were reluctant to admit this, or to discuss the big issues seriously and honestly. Instead politicians tried to market themselves and their proposals like soap powder, while telling voters falsely that their views really mattered. This just increased voter disillusion. Greater humility by politicians would help a lot.
The other fundamental issue was how to mesh democratic practices with the digital world. Currently, the social media could be very powerful influences in some political areas, but mostly on a self-selecting and self-reinforcing basis, and more often negative about individuals or policies than constructive. Politicians used the social media themselves as communication devices, but politics had not yet changed significantly. There was no consensus on whether the internet had changed everything or just speeded things up, but the former view predominated.
How serious were these problems? Most mature democracies could probably continue to muddle through for some time yet. But the lack of interest in traditional democratic processes by the young (who were just as engaged as ever by issues, but not by current politicians) could prove fatal over time. Revolutions and “democratic accidents”, where populist, or even openly undemocratic, parties using more appealing language and promising simple solutions were elected, certainly could not be ruled out. The current trends in some European countries were genuinely alarming, not least the rise of the Front National in France. However there were also counter-examples available — the Scottish referendum had engaged the Scottish population fully because they had seen the result as key to their futures, and the Scottish National Party had recently gained members dramatically.
What were the cures for these ills? We were agreed that there were no magic bullets. But one key had to be to find new ways of engaging voters through allowing them greater participation, and using the power of the digital world. It was easier to say this than to identify effective ways of doing it. We were on the whole suspicious of devices like on-line referenda on wide ranges of issues. But greater use of online consultative groups chosen at random (to avoid the problem of self-selecting lobbies) needed to be explored. Active online monitoring of political decisions was another way forward, and an already increasing phenomenon, as was “watchdogging”, where claims were constantly checked against facts. An interesting proposal made by a number of participants was to use a lottery to select citizens to be given political responsibilities at local level, as a way of both increasing participation and demonstrating how difficult political decision-making was in reality.
The question of money in politics came up quite a lot, mostly in the US context, where the sums involved massively outweighed those in other mature democracies, and seemed to be a major distorting factor. We saw little prospect of substantive change in the US, while hoping that there would be. Elsewhere, there was a lively debate about how best to finance political parties, and many different models, but no obvious right answer.
Several participants questioned whether the model of representative democracy was still relevant and effective, when its key mediating elements, political parties, were so weak and discredited. Perhaps the time had come to move toward more direct, participative models. Others were worried that such models could prove unmanageable and ultimately undemocratic, and could certainly prove dangerous to hard-won rights in areas where unmediated public opinion could be crude and hostile (e.g. the death penalty). Individuals could be harder to control than parties. The majority view seemed to be that new participatory techniques and devices should be seen as complementary to, rather than an alternative to, representative democracy and the role of political parties. But this was an area which needed further exploration. Certainly something had to change and soon.
The other issue raised frequently around the table was the quality of current democratic leadership, which often appeared mediocre at best. We agreed that heroic leaders in the Churchill mould only appeared when there was an existential crisis demanding such qualities. However, it was still not unreasonable to hope that our leaders might occasionally rise above their short-term tactical concerns, and electoral deadlines, to present visions of the future and debates on the fundamental issues which would really engage the voting public, without lapsing into simplistic and dangerous populism.
Problems of newer democracies
The issues in the newer democracies, insofar as a clear distinction of this kind could be drawn, and in countries hoping to transition to democracy, were often starker and arguably more serious. The positive side of greater voter enthusiasm was often more than matched by the habit of many politicians, once elected, to trample on the rights of citizens, and manipulate the decision-making processes and institutions for their own ends. Corruption was often a deep-seated malaise which was ultimately incompatible with real democracy. Some newer democracies also lacked a community of values or even a sufficient sense of national identity. There was also a phenomenon of “authoritarian learning”, where undemocratic regimes picked up lessons from each other on how to repress and stay in power, including how to use the new media to do so.
The internet had on the whole been a boon to those trying to promote democracy where it had not existed before. People could see how people lived in other countries, and realise that their aspirations were not just impossible dreams. They could communicate with other like-minded individuals. Popular protest and the phenomenon of ‘squares’, where people did not just go to demonstrate, but also to live and demand change over periods of weeks or months, were changing the dynamics of politics in many countries. However the social media could be a double-edged sword, as authoritarian regimes learned how to use it to stifle dissent and track down dissenters.
A fundamental problem in some countries trying to transition to democracy was the lack of a well-established and confident civil society, which was one of the most important checks and balances on the power of the executive. This could not be created or re-created quickly. It had after all taken England/Britain almost 800 years to move from Magna Carta to full democracy. This problem was most glaring in countries where dictators had systemically destroyed national institutions, traditional sources of power and influence, and civil society in general, and were then toppled. Subsequent elections could be successfully held, with enthusiastic participation by the newly-free population. But the necessary underpinnings to sustain and consolidate democracy were simply not there. The Arab Spring had dramatically exemplified this in several countries, resulting in either chaos or counter-revolution/military rule (though some argued that the Arab Spring story was far from over and that the desire for freedom and democracy would inevitably reassert itself again).
In this context we discussed again whether fundamentalist Islam and democracy could co-exist. We were reluctant to conclude that this was necessarily the case, but we did note that some were trying to use a purist form of Islam around the world to suppress certain basic rights. Their attitudes certainly did not seem to fit traditional ideas of ‘liberal’ democracy. Could there be such a thing as an ‘illiberal’ democracy? We doubted it.
We saw no easy solution to this issue of civil society absence. Time and encouragement were bound to be needed to develop what was needed. In any event it was vital to recognise the fundamental value of and need for accountable institutions, vibrant civil society organisations and democratic habits and attitudes (such as acceptance of election losses, and the idea of a loyal opposition). That was exactly why elections did not equal democracy.
On the positive side, newer democracies often had less hang-ups about change and innovation, and use of the digital tools, than mature ones, some of which seemed reluctant to tamper with their own ‘sacred’ institutions and traditions, even when these were manifestly not working. This did not prevent some of these mature democracies from continuing to lecture the newer ones — but too often it was a case of “Physician – heal thyself”, which undermined the message.
Promoting democracy
We were agreed that it was not enough to hope that democratic values and institutions would speak for themselves, or emerge without help. They needed to be actively promoted and defended. At national level, civic education, particularly in schools, was the most important way of doing this, but it was far too often neglected or done half-heartedly. The media clearly had a vital role to play but their impact was often double-edged. They were vital to exposing abuses of democracy such as corruption, and were an essential part of democratic accountability. At the same time the penchant in some countries for the media to denigrate all politicians and indeed all politics inevitably contributed to public disillusion, and even threatened to undermine democracy itself, by helping lay the foundations for dangerous populism. This was just a fact of life where we saw little chance of change – the cure would always risk being worse than the disease if freedom of expression were curtailed. But journalists did need to recognise how much power they wielded in this area, positive and negative.
An ever trickier question was whether the international community, or at least the democratic parts of it, should intervene if democracy were threatened in a particular country or overturned. The general view around the table seemed to be that in principle it should. Diplomatic and other peaceful means of pressure could and should be deployed. But there was the usual difficult discussion about exactly when more coercive outside interventions, particularly of a military kind, could be justified: who could authorise them, on the basis of what criteria, and who should carry them out? The Responsibility to Protect doctrine encouraged intervention to save populations from major abuses but did not really answer these kinds of questions. At the same time, it was noted that not intervening could itself be seen as a form of intervention. The role of the outside world in the success and failure of the Arab Spring in several countries should not be underestimated.
There was acceptance that democracy could not be successfully imposed from outside, except in special and unusual circumstances (Germany and Japan after WWII), still less particular models of democracy. The impetus and the will had to come from within if democracy were to be sustainable. Nevertheless outsiders did have a role. One participant compared this to helping prepare the ground, for democracy, and even planting the seeds, without being able to take responsibility for whether they grew successfully.
It was in any case vital that those campaigning for democracy and human rights inside countries where this was difficult felt they had international support, even where there was no prospect of any outside intervention e.g. in China. International standards to which countries could be held were important, and international organisations such as the UN and the Commonwealth could play an important role in not only spreading democratic ideals, but also holding countries to account. The recently agreed Commonwealth Charter was held up as an excellent modern document in this area.
We also looked in this context at the link between democracy and economic success. The temptation to think that this link had been broken was tempting, in the wake of the 2007/2008 financial crisis, and the economic success of countries like China. But many participants argued that this was a false, short-term view. In the long run only democracies could foster the innovation, creativity and rule of law necessary for successful and sustainable economic growth, and provide the necessary underpinning for genuine efforts to root out corruption. Democracies could make plenty of mistakes. They could for example harbour large and increasing inequalities, as was currently the case in several western democracies. But this was not the fault of democracy itself. Indeed this point could be argued the other way: the link between poverty and lack of opportunity in authoritarian societies where most people had no voice was also strong.
International aspects of democracy
We did not explore this interesting area in detail, but some useful points were registered. Democratic deficits could exist not only within states but between states and across global institutions and problems. Examples included the current unrepresentative make-up of the Security Council, obvious problems of democratic legitimacy within the EU and the Eurozone, and questions such as how people’s democratic views could be taken into account over a globally threatening issue like climate change. We had no new answers to offer in these areas.
One issue which did detain us was the relationship between democracy and the nation state. This was complex. On the one hand the sovereign nation state was making a comeback, as could be seen from the aggressive nationalism of Russia and, in a different way, China. On the other, the relevance of the nation state was being challenged by global problems and global digital groups, to neither of which national borders mattered, and by movements such as ISIL. How far should this worry us and could it ultimately destroy democracy? The nation state had been a key building block of democracy. It was difficult to see how democracy could be exercised effectively without defined boundaries within which people could share identities, values and processes. At the same time, national boundaries often seemed to matter less and less to many people, particularly those active in the digital space.
A related issue was how democracies should deal with nationalism. What criteria could and should be used to determine which regions of a country, if any, should be given the right to determine their own future, and secede from their state if they so chose? There was absolutely no consistency of policy or practice around the globe about this. One fear was that democratic countries ready to allow restless regions to secede would finish up not only weakening themselves but also discrediting democracy in the eyes of governments around the world fearful of national break-up.
Recommendations
No neat list could be agreed from such a wide-ranging discussion, but the following key points could be distilled from the discussion:
– Democracy should not lose confidence in itself – other systems’ weaknesses would always show through in the end.
– All democracies urgently need to look for innovative ways of engaging voters: participation, participation, participation.
– Young voters have to be a particular target — the “grey vote” is not enough to sustain a vibrant democracy.
– New ways of using social media and online communities to engage voters are particularly urgently needed. Best practice round the world should be studied and copied.
– Compulsory attendance at voting places should be seriously considered.
– Introducing the vote at 16 is similarly well worth considering.
– Online consultative groups selected at random could be a useful device.
– Online monitoring and watchdogging are other ways of helping communities and voters engage with the democratic process.
– Appointing some local decision-makers by lottery may be worth trying.
– Politicians should work harder to put the real issues on the table, and engage the imaginations of their citizens.
– Civic education about democracy, particularly in schools, needs to be given more time and emphasis.
– The traditional media should be more aware of the risk of undermining democracy itself by their enthusiasm for criticism of democratic politicians and institutions.
– The reality that elections do not create democracy by themselves should be more widely recognised.
– Building a strong civil society should always be a fundamental aim of those trying to foster democracy.
– Democracies and democrats around the world should support each other and be ready to exert pressure on non-democratic countries and leaders.
– Outside intervention to bring about or restore democracy in a particular country should not be ruled out in principle, but military action could only be contemplated in extreme circumstances and on the basis of careful and informed judgment.
Conclusion
The discussion sounds gloomy, but we were reminded more than once that there were also plenty of reasons to be cheerful about the state of the world: the lifting of hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, the empowering potential of the internet for most people, and the sense of common humanity which is now more widespread than ever. Whatever its problems, democracy continues to have a huge amount to offer and is a mark of civilized advance aimed at allowing people to fulfil and express themselves, resolve problems through dialogue, not violence, and lead dignified lives. Younger generations in mature democracies are at severe risk of undervaluing such a precious gift, and of accidentally losing it. All those committed to democracy should do all in their power to prevent this from happening.
This Note reflects the Director’s personal impressions of the conference. No participant is in any way committed to its content or expression.
CHAIR: The Rt Hon. the Lord Judge
Treasurer, The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple; Distinguished Associate, Darwin College, University of Cambridge; Distinguished Visitor and Visiting Professor, Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s London. Formerly: Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (2008-13); President of the Queen’s Bench Division (2005-08); Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales (1998-2003).
AUSTRALIA
Dr Roland Rich
Formerly: Executive Head, United Nations Democracy Fund, New York (2007-14); Ambassador of Australia to Laos (1994-97).
BANGLADESH
Mr Mahfuz Anam
Editor and Publisher, The Daily Star (1993-); Formerly: Chairman, Asia News Network (2007-8).
BOTSWANA
Ms Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba
Founder, The Masire-Mwamba Office for Diplomacy, Governance and Leadership Development, Gaborone; Botswana Candidate for Commonwealth Secretary General (2015). Hon. Bencher, Middle Temple Inn.
CANADA
Professor André Blais
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Montreal; Fellow, Royal Society of Canada. Formerly: Chair, Planning Committee, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (2009-14).
Mr Eric Termuende
Director and Co-Founder, Gen Y Inc. Formerly: VP Operations and Finance, University of Calgary Students’ Union.
CHINA
The Hon. Mrs Anson Chan GBM, GCMG, CBE, JP
Convenor, Hong Kong 2020. Formerly: Chief Secretary for Administration, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (1997-2001); Chief Secretary of Hong Kong (1993-97).
INDIA
Ms Rajni Bakshi
Senior Gandhi Peace Fellow, Gateway House – Indian Council on Global Relations; Board Member: Child Rights and You (CRY) and Citizens for Peace; Executive Committee Member, Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti (autonomous body under the Ministry of Culture); Associate, Centre of Education and Documentation, Mumbai and Bangalore.
INDONESIA
Dr I Ketut Putra Erawan
Executive Director, Institute for Peace and Democracy, Formerly: Special Advisor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (2008-09); Ministry of Interior Affairs expert in developing Package Law of Politics (2006-08) and for reviewing Electoral Commission Law (2006-07).
IRAN/USA
Ms Mariam Memarsadeghi
Co-Founder and Co-Director, Tavaana: E-Learning Institute for Iranian Civil Society, Washington, DC; Judge, annual “We The People” nationwide high school competition on the US Constitution. Formerly: Director, Middle East and North Africa programs, and Founder, Iran Program, Freedom House.
IRAQ/USA
Ms Rend Al-Rahim
Co-founder and President (formerly Executive Director), Iraq Foundation. Formerly: Ambassador of Iraq to the USA.
ITALY
Mrs Antonella Valmorbida
Secretary General, ALDA – The European Association for Local Democracy, Strasbourg. Formerly Chair, Committee on Democracy and Civil Society, Conference of International Non-Governmental Organisations, Council of Europe (2008-11).
NAMIBIA
Dr Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari
Senior Research Fellow, South African Foreign Policy and African Drivers Programme, South African Institute of International Affairs, University of the Witwatersrand. Formerly: Chef de Cabinet and Senior Special Assistant to the Prime Minister of the Republic of Namibia (2002-03).
PORTUGAL
Mr Àlvaro Vasconcelos
Visiting Professor, Institute for International Relations, University of São Paulo (2014-); Director of Projects and Associate Senior Researcher, Arab Reform Initiative, Paris. Formerly: Director, European Union Institute for Security Studies, Paris (2007-12); Co-Founder (1981) and Director (1981-2007), Instituto de Estudos Estratégicos e Internacionais, Lisbon.
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
Ms Sonja Licht
Founder and President, Belgrade Fund for Political Excellence (2003-); Founder, Belgrade Security Forum (2011-). Chair, Foreign Affairs Council, Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2009-12); Executive Director then President, Fund for an Open Society (Soros Foundation) Yugoslavia (later Serbia) (1991-2003).
TURKEY
Mrs Özge Genç
Programme Director, Democratization programme, Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation, Istanbul (2006-).
Professor Fuat Keyman
Director, Istanbul Policy Center; Professor of International Relations, Sabanci University. Formerly: Lecturer, Department of International Relations, Koç University (2002-10); Member, Council of Wise People (as part of Kurdish Peace Process).
UK
The Lord Aldington
Vice President, National Churches Trust (2008-); Trustee, Royal Academy Trust (2003-); Chairman, 2019 Committee, New College, Oxford. Formerly: Chairman, Deutsche Bank London (2002-09). A Governor and Member of the Council of Management and Business Committee and Chairman of the Finance and General Purposes Committee of The Ditchley Foundation.
Mr Paul Arkwright
Director, Multilateral Policy, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) (2013-). Formerly: Ambassador to the Netherlands (2009-13).
Dr Andrew Blick
Lecturer in Politics and Contemporary History, King’s London; Formerly: Adviser to democratic reform groups in Ukraine and Turkey.
Professor Vernon Bogdanor CBE FBA
Research Professor, Institute of Contemporary History, King’s London; Fellow, British Academy. Formerly: Professor of Government, University of Oxford; Vice-Principal, Brasenose College.
The Rt Hon. Dominic Grieve QC, MP
Member of Parliament (Conservative) for Beaconsfield (1997-). Formerly: Attorney General (2010-14). A Governor of The Ditchley Foundation.
Professor Robert Hazell CBE
Founder (1995) and Director of The Constitution Unit, School of Public Policy, University College London. Formerly: Director, Nuffield Foundation (1989-95).
Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield FBA
Crossbench Peer, House of Lords; Attlee Professor of Contemporary British History, Queen Mary College, University of London (1992-); Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly: Chairman, Kennedy Memorial Trust (1995-2000). A Governor, a Member of the Council of Management and of the Programme Committee, The Ditchley Foundation.
The Rt Hon. the Lord Howell
Life Peer, House of Lords (1997-). Formerly: Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (2010-12); Shadow Deputy Leader of the House of Lords (2005-10).
Lady Judge CBE
Chairman, UK Pension Protection Fund (2010-). Formerly: Chairman, United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority; Director. News International; Commissioner, US Securities and Exchange Commission. A Governor and a Member of the Programme Committee and Business Committee, The Ditchley Foundation.
UK/USA
Mr Scott Burns
Managing Partner, Brown Rudnick, London.
Sir Robert Worcester KBE DL
Honorary Professor of Politics (2002-), University of Kent; Founder, Market & Opinion Research International (MORI); Chair, Magna Carta 2015 800th Anniversary Committee. Formerly: Chancellor, University of Kent (2006-13). A Governor, The Ditchley Foundation.
USA
Dr Shadi Hamid
Fellow, Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution; Vice Chair (formerly Director of Research), Project on Middle East Democracy, Washington. Formerly: Director of Research, Brookings Doha Center).
Professor Daniel Magraw
Professorial Lecturer, School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University; Chair, Task Force on Magna Carta, Section on International Law, American Bar Association. Formerly: President and Chief Executive Officer, Center for International Environmental Law, Washington, DC (2002-10).
Mr Matthew Smith
Fulbright Student/Master’s Candidate in Public Policy, University of Warwick. Formerly: Director of Wolf PAC Indiana.
Professor Mark Warren
Harold and Dorrie Merilees Chair in the Study of Democracy, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia. Formerly: Co-Founder, Center for Democracy and the Third Sector, Department of Government, Georgetown University.
Mr Kenneth Wollack
National Democratic Institute (1986-): President (1993-); Executive Vice President (1986-93). Formerly: Chairman, US Committee, United Nations Development Programme.
Mr Stephen Zack
Attorney and Partner, Boies Schiller and Flexner, LLP. Formerly: President, American Bar Association (2010-12).
Magna Carta International Poll results released
Public awareness of Magna Carta was surveyed last month in 23 countries from Argentina to Canada, India to the US by the Ipsos MORI survey organisation for the Magna Carta 800th Commemoration Committee.
The results revealed that eight in ten (79%) British adults are ‘aware’ of Magna Carta, double the 23 country average level of recognition of 39%. Next highest, scoring in the 60s are the USA (65%), Hungary (63%), Italy (62%) and Spain (61%).
In contrast, just six per cent of adults in France say they are aware of Magna Carta, lower than other countries including Poland (10%), China (18%) and South Korea (21%).
Three in four (74%) British adults also claim they are aware of the 1776 US Declaration of Independence and two thirds (64%) the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights. Only one in five British adults said they were aware of the Commonwealth Charter – a document signed by Her Majesty Queen in 2013.
The poll also asked users to answer questions about which rights they thought were most under threat in their society today. This question was not asked in China.
The survey included a fictitious ‘International Declaration of Democracy of 1910’, inserted by the pollsters to check how many just guessed. In Britain, one in eleven (9%) mistakenly believe they know about this non-existent document.
To see the results of the 23 countries surveyed, click here.
February 22, 2015
Council confirm discovered Magna Carta will return to Sandwich
Kent Online, 19th February 2015
“The Magna Carta will be coming back to the people of Sandwich, the town council has confirmed.
The historic document, worth £10 million, will not be sold after a majority of councillors at the meeting voted to keep it.
Cllr John Bragg said: “It’s our intention to get the Magna Carta and Charter of Forest back to Sandwich and hope that we will be able to exhibit it.
It was found by historian Dr Mark Bateson in the archives at Maidstone, folded inside a Victorian scrapbook.
Cllr Jeremy Watts said: “It is one of the biggest things that has happened to Sandwich in a very long time.
“We shouldn’t make any hasty decisions about it until a working party can consider all the alternatives.”
The council decided a working group consisting of the Mayor of Sandwich Cllr Paul Graeme, deputy mayor Cllr Pip Russell, Cllr David Wood, Cllr John Bragg and archivist Ray Harlow would flesh out the finer details.
Cllr Wood said: “I think that it should stay in Sandwich, that’s very important. The only rush is this exhibition and that will be a big boost for the town.”
He was referring to a free touring exhibition to celebrate the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta, being organised by Visit Kent. The exhibition will visit Faversham, Canterbury, Maidstone, Dover, Rochester and hopefully Sandwich from May to October this year.”
February 19, 2015
Magna Carta will visit Canada for its 800th Anniversary
February 17, 2015 – Ottawa – Department of Canadian Heritage
The Great Charter and its companion, the Charter of the Forest, will tour four cities in Canada, June 11 to December 29, 2015
Canadians will have the opportunity to see and learn about the Magna Carta, the document that set the groundwork for our democracy, justice and human rights. This was announced today by the Honourable Pierre Poilievre, Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Democratic Reform, on behalf of the Honourable Shelly Glover, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, and all members of the House of Commons.
The Magna Carta, or Great Charter, was created in 1215. It was the first document in English jurisprudence to state the monarch was not above the law and it became the basis for freedom, democracy and rule of law in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, including Canada.
Quick Facts
– The 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta will be marked in 2015.
– The Government of Canada is providing $500,000 to Magna Carta Canada to bring the Great Charter and its companion, the Charter of the Forest, to four cities in Canada from June 11 to December 29, 2015.
– The two documents will tour Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg and Edmonton.
– Magna Carta Canada will also create lesson plans and educational materials about democracy, the rule of law, civil rights, women’s rights and the use of the environment.
– The Charter was created by the barons of King John, led by Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton, because they wished to curb the sovereign’s spending and power.
– Over many years, the document was refined into four key points: nobody is above the law; all are entitled to freedom from unlawful detention (habeas corpus); all have the right to a trial by jury; and widows could not be forced into marriage and give up their property—an early first step in women’s rights.
Quotes
“When the Fathers of Confederation came together at the Québec Conference in 1864, they were unanimous the new country should remain a constitutional monarchy based on the concepts expressed in the Magna Carta: freedom, democracy and the rule of law should be the birthright of every citizen. This year, when we mark the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta, we will celebrate everything that makes Canada strong, proud and free.”
—The Honourable Shelly Glover, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
“As a free and democratic nation, Canada has evolved based on the process that flowed from the Magna Carta in England. As proud bearers of the democratic concepts expressed in the Magna Carta, Canadians are the heirs to a tradition of freedom and stewards of a legacy that was centuries in the making.”
—The Honourable Pierre Poilievre, Minister of Employment and Social Development and Minister of Democratic Reform
“We are extremely grateful for the generous support of the Government of Canada in helping us bring the Magna Carta and its companion document, the Charter of the Forest, to Canada. This support helps us to provide Canadians with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to experience these groundbreaking historical documents, which lie at the heart of our democratic values, and to learn about how integral they have been to the development of governance and the rule of law in Canada.”
—Len and Suzy Rodness, Co-Chairs, Magna Carta Canada
To view this release on the Department of Canadian Heritage’s page, click here.
Magna Carta cake on display at Salisbury Cathedral
BBC, 19th February 2015
An exact replica of the Magna Carta, made out of cake, has gone on display at Salisbury Cathedral.
Baker Christine Jensen, from Penzance, took 94 hours to make the clone of the document, which set out the ideals of liberty and justice in 1215.
The edible version is on show while Salisbury Cathedral’s copy of the original, Audemars Piguet Replica Watches one of four that have survived, is not on display.
Ms Jensen, 40, said the cake was a “huge undertaking”.
“It is a one-to-one ratio, historically accurate representation in fondant, so you could actually eat the document if you wanted to,” she said.
“Creatively and from a design point of view it was a lot of work. However, it was a story worth celebrating.”
It took 22 hours for her to rewrite 4,000 words in mediaeval Latin
Ms Jensen, who started making cakes professionally last year, said she had to cut down the nib of an edible ink pen in order for it to be fine enough to produce the tiny lettering.
It took 22 hours to rewrite the 4,000 words of mediaeval Latin.
Her work also includes the frame and the base, which features an edible version of Frank Wood’s painting of King John sealing the Magna Carta at Runnymede.
The cathedral’s copy of the document is to go back on display to the public on 7 March,www.unapwatch.com as part of a new exhibition marking the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta.
February 17, 2015
Cartmel Priory Host Anniversary Celebrations
Our celebrations begin in June with a David Starkey lecture on Magna Carta and the presentation of the winning entry’s in the Magna Carta Young Writer’s Poetry Competition. A schools’ Democracy Day generating a legacy of Magna Carta school age resource materials and a second historical lecture by Dr Alan Crosby will pave the way to our main five day celebrations from 25th -29th September.
With the support and involvement of the village community, the celebrations on weekend days are enhanced with a ‘living history Medieval Tourney and Fayre’, and a ‘Son et Lumière’ featuring the Priory’s founder. Increased visitor provision on the 28th September comes from a further Magna Carta lecture and, illustrating Magna Carta’s influence through the centuries, Talks & Tours of the village provided by the Local History Society. The concert programme features leading national early music instrumental group ‘La Serenissima’ and also performances by local award winning musicians, ‘Amabile’ girls’ choir and Flookburgh Band whose concert will conclude with a firework display.
For details and tickets please see www.cartmelpriory.org.uk
For the full article click here.
Pleshey to Stage a Medieval Weekend on site of Motte and Bailey Castle
Pleshey Magna Carta Celebrations will engage, enlighten and entertain our local community with the significance of Magna Carta and the part played in this momentous moment in history by our baron, Geoffrey de Mandeville.
The celebrations will launch on 20th March with the presentation to the village of a facsimile of Magna Carta from the Magna Carta Barons Association; and a talk from Chelmsford Museum’s Curator describing the events leading up to Magna Carta and the role of our rebel baron.
On 9th and 10th May Pleshey will stage a Medieval Weekend with re-enactments and living history displays on the motte and bailey site of Pleshey Castle.
During the year, a Sewing Bee will bring members of the community together to create a commemorative wall hanging for Holy Trinity. The children will also have a special time together learning about Magna Carta and creating their own artwork, which will go on permanent display in the Village Hall. We will also be involving the three local village schools, creating assemblies and touring the Magna Carta facsimile.
For the full article & more info on the celebrations commencing in Pleshey, click here.
February 16, 2015
Leavenheath Open Gardens & Magna Carta Scarecrow Day
To celebrate the sealing of Magna Carta, Leavenheath village in Suffolk which is 8 miles north of Colchester on the A134 close to Constable Country, will be commemorating the event with a number of gardens being open. An exhibition in the village hall of the 25 Baron shields painted by a cross section of the community with an explanation of who each Baron was and where he came from in England. Scarecrows with a medieval theme will be in the village with clues to solve.
A dateline showing the key dates on how the Magna Carta influenced our democracy, especially the part Suffolk played in the meeting of the Barons in November 1214 at Bury St Edmunds will be on display. A full size brass rubbing of a Knight who is buried locally will be shown together with other Magna Carta information. A choir will be singing period songs in one of the open gardens and visitors will be able to visit a medieval house of the 14th century.
This is a charitable event with all profit from the event after expenses, being divided between Leavenheath Scouts/Cubs/Beavers and the East Anglia’s Children’s Hospice. For more information, visit www.leavenheath.org.
February 12, 2015
PMQs: A new Magna Carta?
Q15. [907581] Mr Graham Allen (Nottingham North) (Lab): If he will commission a new Magna Carta to renew democracy in the UK as part of the celebrations of the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta; and if he will make a statement.
The Prime Minister: We should be proud that in Magna Carta our country established rules of justice and freedom that, 800 years later, still inform our constitution and resonate around the world. While there is a long-standing debate over the issue, there are no plans at present for a written constitution.
Mr Allen: I note that the Prime Minister says “at present”. Does he agree, though, that there are unacceptably high levels of voter disengagement, with more people staying at home than voted Labour and Conservative at the last election? Would he commit his Government, now, to preparing an all-party constitutional convention, in order to give every UK citizen a copy of our society’s rulebook—either a statute of the Union or a written constitution—as a part of electors feeling once again that they own our democracy?
The Prime Minister: Obviously, I always look at the hon. Gentleman’s suggestions very carefully, because he has made a number of sensible cross-party interventions over recent years, but I have my doubts whether another talking convention is the answer. I think we need to look at some of the constitutional issues that leave people feeling left behind, not least English votes for English laws, and make sure that we put those things in place. The disappointment I have with the Labour party is that it is prepared to talk about all-party talks on Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, but when it comes to empowering English people and making sure that they have rights in this House, it is completely absent from the debate.
Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con): Article 39 of Magna Carta contains the origins of our right to trial by jury. In a recent report, Sir Brian Leveson, not satisfied with undermining the right to a free press, wants to restrict the right to trial by jury. Will my right hon. Friend, as long as he is Prime Minister, defend our historic rights?
The Prime Minister: I am a great supporter of jury trial. I think it is one of the very important things we have in this country that safeguard people’s rights and freedoms, and I do not want to see it reduced.
Click here to download this as a transcript.
Click here to view the Hansard Society’s website.
February 11, 2015
Discover King John’s Palace – On the Trail of Magna Carta
King John’s Palace lies at the heart of the former Royal Hunting Forest of Sherwood, but few people fully appreciate its global significance.
The Magna Carta 800 funding will enable us to create a 5 km interpreted Magna Carta trail that connects King John’s Palace to the Parliament Oak (one of the oldest trees in Sherwood) utilising existing Rights of Way. We will create 5 bespoke resource chests for schools (filled with fact sheets, work sheets, books and activities), that they can hire free of charge during and after the project. We see both of these elements as providing a great legacy for Magna Carta within Britain’s greatest Forest, which will last long into the future.
For the full article, click here.
February 9, 2015
Magna Carta worth £10m found in council archives
The Telegraph, 8th February 2015
‘An edition of the Magna Carta that could be worth up to £10 million has been found after it lay forgotten in a council’s archives.
The discovery of the version of the historical parchment that established the principle of the rule of law, in the files of the history department of Kent County Council, has been described as an important historical find by an expert.
The document was found in the archives kept in Maidstone, Kent, but belonging to the town of Sandwich.
Professor Nicholas Vincent, of the University of East Anglia, who authenticated the document, said: “It is a fantastic discovery which comes in the week that the four other known versions were brought together at the Houses of Parliament.
“It is a fantastic piece of news for Sandwich, which puts it in a small category of towns and institutions that own a 1300 issue.”
Prof Vincent said the fact Sandwich had its own Magna Carta gives backing to the theory that it was issued more widely than previously thought to at least 50 cathedral towns and ports.
He added the discovery gives him hope that further copies will also turn up.
There are only 24 editions of the Magna Carta in known existence around the world.
Prof Vincent said: “It must have been much more widely distributed than previously thought because if Sandwich had one… the chances are it went out to a lot of other towns. It is very likely that there are one or two out there somewhere that no one has spotted yet.”
Prof Vincent, who specialises in medieval history, said the value of the Sandwich edition could be up to £10million, but it was ripped with about a third missing.
He said: “This would be an upper value as it has, like the town of Sandwich, suffered over time from French invasions and the like.”
February 7, 2015
Magna Carta freedoms ‘under threat’ today, MPs warned
The Telegraph, Thursday 5th February 2015
John Bingham, Social Affairs Editor
MPs were warned not to betray 800 years of progress towards freedom as the four surviving copies of Magna Carta were brought together in Parliament for the first time.
For one day only, the original copies of the 1215 Great Charter of liberties, held by Salisbury and Lincoln cathedrals and the British Library, went on display in the House of Lords on Thursday.
The parchment manuscripts were transported to the Houses of Parliament overnight in conditions of strict secrecy from the British library where they have been on display to 1,215 members of the public, chosen by ballot, over the past three days.
It is the first time the surviving copies of the charter, agreed between King John and the barons at Runnymede, near Windsor, have been reunited since they were issued.
Organisers refused to disclose any details of the security arrangements to transport what are arguably the most precious constitutional documents in the world.
Although the Lincoln copy has previously travelled to the United States and Australia, it is the first time Salisbury Cathedral’s Magna Carta has left Wiltshire since 1215.
Other than being stored under a quarry in the north of the county to protect it from the risk of bombing during the Second World War, it has never previously left the precincts of the cathedral.
Speaking at the opening of the exhibition in the Royal Gallery, the Speaker of the Commons John Bercow told MPs and peers that it was a vivid reminder of how something forged amid a “crisis of government” had become the foundation of principles as basic as the rule of law.
Lord Cormack, chairman both of the History of Parliament Trust and the Historic Lincoln Trust, described it as a “very, very special day” in the history of Parliament.
“Today is unique,” he said. “For the first time ever legislators have a chance to gaze and reflect upon the only surviving copies of the most important document in our nation’s history, the foundation of the rule of law here and throughout the world.”
February 5, 2015
‘Icon of Justice – Pledge of Freedom’ Hereford Cathedral hosts Exhibition
Hereford’s Magna Carta is the focal point for an exciting range of events, activities and an exhibition of original documents and artefacts in 2015.
Running from 23 March to 30 September 2015, the exhibition entitled ‘Magna Carta: Icon of Justice – Pledge of Freedom’ will give a taste of the 13th century to visitors, with period illuminations and documents from the historic Chained Library displayed alongside the Magna Carta.
The Hereford Magna Carta, the finest surviving 1217 exemplar, represents the most significant revision of the original 1215 document issued during the reign of King John’s son Henry III.
To read the full article, click here.
February 4, 2015
Castle Hedingham Community Celebrates Magna Carta with Art
The organisers of the Castle Hedingham Community Celebrations of the Magna Carta are delighted to confirm they have been successful in attracting additional funds for this diverse project. The village has been awarded the sum of £2,225.00 by the Magna Carta Trust which is responsible for allocating UK Government Grant monies to mark the 800th anniversary of the sealing of this historic document.
These new funds are specifically for two permanent community art and design projects. They focus on the significance of the Magna Carta and the part that Castle Hedingham and its Magna Carta baron, the 3rd Earl of Oxford Robert de Vere, played in the story. Both pieces celebrate the importance of the Magna Carta in the evolution of democracy, not just in the UK, but across the world.
“The involvement of local volunteers, local craftspeople and the children in both our local schools is paramount to this project,” explained Christina Applebee who is leading both projects. “It’s great to be able to bring together so many sections of our community under the banner of the Magna Carta.”
The project consists of an embroidered panel, measuring 1m x 68cms, in a locally made showcase and textile banners measuring 2.46m x 38cms, using a variety of textile techniques. Another banner of a similar size will be created by the children at De Vere primary who will also receive, as part of the funding, 25 tabards to wear for the play they will be performing.
Pupils at Hedingham School are also working on the design and production of a 2m x 60cms board of digitised graphic art that will eventually be displayed on a dedicated notice board to be erected in Castle Hedingham.
Ultimately, the embroidery and banners will be part of an exhibition that is currently being developed with the help of the Braintree Museum. It will first be staged in St. Nicholas Church in Castle Hedingham during the celebrations in June and will move to the Braintree Museum itself in September.
Details of the various other music, drama and art activities to celebrate the Magna Carta will be confirmed in the coming months. A waymarked footpath between Hedingham Castle and Clare Castle, home to Richard de Clare and another Magna Carta baron, will also be published in early Spring.
The overall programme benefits from a Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) Sharing Heritage grant of £9,700 which has been given to help Castle Hedingham honour its involvement in laying the foundations of constitutional law through the sealing of the Magna Carta.
February 3, 2015
University of Lincoln set up workshops with Ruth Ewan
Taking cue from Lincoln’s historic connections with the Magna Carta and the Charter of the Forest artist Ruth Ewan will develop a series of collaborative workshops with young people which will result in the creation of new works exploring the continuity of ideas first put forward via these historic documents.
The workshops will use graphic text and experimental cartography to explore ideas rooted in the historic charters and their continued relevance to the present and possible futures. The challenge will be set to map a global commons. These workshops will result in a series of slogans, text works and drawn maps.
The project forms part of Lincoln university’s first commissioning programme, taking place in sites and partner venues across the city of Lincoln in the year of the Magna Carta’s 800 year anniversary which will include two further commission during the year, also taking inspiration from Magna Carta.
For the full story, click here.
February 2, 2015
The Magna Carta Explained
The Telegraph, 2nd February 2015
‘As the four original surviving copies of the Magna Carta are brought together under the same roof for the first time, here is a Q&A about the document
The Magna Carta was granted 800 years ago. So what is it, how did it come about, and what does it do today?
What is Magna Carta?
Magna Carta is an 800-year-old document containing the idea that no-one is above the law, and it still forms the foundation of many modern ideas and documents today.
What does Magna Carta mean?
It means “Great Charter” in Latin. In fact the whole document is in Latin.
When and where was Magna Carta granted?
Magna Carta was first drawn up in 1215, granted by King John on June 15 at Runnymede near the River Thames in Surrey. A different version (the one we draw from today) was reissued by John’s son, Henry III, 10 years later in 1225. Magna Carta was finally enrolled on the statute book (meaning it became part of English law) by Edward I in 1297.
How many of the original Magna Carta documents survive?
King John sent copies of the first Magna Carta across his kingdom – though we are not certain about the actual number. Today only four survive: one in Lincoln Cathedral, one in Salisbury Cathedral, and two in the British Library.
Why was Magna Carta first written and granted?
Despite what it stands for today, Magna Carta was not written with lofty ideas of justice and liberty in mind. It was originally meant as a peace treaty between King John (of Robin Hood fame) and his barons, with whom he was at war. The barons had captured London and John found himself in a political mess – he needed a quick get-out solution.
Did Magna Carta achieve its short-term aims of creating peace?
Not at all – in fact it failed spectacularly. Although John agreed to Magna Carta at first, he quickly became bitter when its terms were forced upon him. He wrote to the Pope to get it annulled. The Pope actually happened to agree with John (for once), saying Magna Carta was “illegal, unjust, harmful to royal rights and shameful to the English people”. He then declared the charter “null and void of all validity for ever”.
Full-scale civil war then broke out between John and his barons. It only ended after John’s death from illness in 1216.
Is it true that King John never “signed” Magna Carta?
Yes, at least not in the way we think of signing. Back in the Middle Ages kings never signed their name on documents to pass them into law. Instead John used his Great Seal to authenticate the document. This subtlety has confused many people over the years. Most recently the Royal Mint has been criticised for the design on its commemorative 800th anniversary £2 coin, which shows John brandishing the document and a quill.’
Worcester Cathedral Organise Series of Children’s Plays
Worcester Cathedral is pleased to announce that it has been awarded funding from the Magna Carta 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee for Magna Carta and King John Play for Schools. The £12,500 funding is part of the Round Two awards of the UK Government’s Grant to support work of the Magna Carta Trust.
The Magna Carta Play, “A tale of Bolshie Barons, a Crafty King and a Timeworn Tomb in Wooded Worcester”, will be high impact and high energy play giving a historical account of Magna Carta and King John and their impact and relevance today. The play will be set in the national context of 13th Century England and also the local context of Worcestershire where King John is buried in www.bestintime.me Worcester Cathedral.
The project was the idea of Susan MacLeod the Operational Manager at Worcester Cathedral. Susan said “I have been working on a programme of Magna Carta and King John related events for the Cathedral for 2015 and 2016. I heard about the plays that Worcester Repertory Company have performed in schools about the Battle of Worcester and that they received great feedback from the schools. I thought that it would be a fun thing to bring to the Cathedral and would capture young people’s imagination and help them to learn about this significant time in history and Worcester’s part in something that has international interest today.”
It is intended that the play will be toured to 50 primary and middle schools in Worcestershire and the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley, aimed at children aged 9 – 12yrs old, during April and May 2015. Some of the plays will be performed in Worcester Cathedral, in the Quire beside King John’s tomb. The play will be offered to schools free of charge thanks to the grant received from The Magna Carta 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee. Schools attending the Cathedral to see the play will also have the opportunity to take part in interpretative activities developing the themes of Liberty, Human Rights and Citizenship emanating from the influence of Magna Carta. These are being organised by the Cathedral’s Education officer Sue Adeney.
Thanks to the funding Chris Jaeger, Chief Executive of Worcester Live, has been commissioned by Worcester Cathedral to write and direct the plays, working with actors from Worcester Repertory company who will perform them in the schools and the Cathedral. For Chris a professional writer, this will be the third play of its kind that he has written for this age group. The actors are also experienced in delivering this type of play with an engaging performance that inspires young people.
For more information, sign up to our newsletter here.
Magna Cartas united at British Library to celebrate 800th anniversary
The four surviving original copies of the 1215 Magna Carta have been brought together for the first time in London. Magna Carta is one of the most important, well-known documents in history and this year marks its 800th anniversary.
More than 40,000 people entered a public ballot to see them, with 1,125 getting the chance to see all four at the British Library over three days.
The Magna Carta was authorised on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede. The document was agreed by King John to appease rebel barons in the heart of battle.
It is considered one of the first steps towards parliamentary democracy and includes the principle that no one was above the law, including the king,
After three days, the documents will be taken to the House of Lords for one day before two are returned to the British Library and the others are taken back to Lincoln and Salisbury Cathedrals, where they are kept.
In a joint statement, the library and cathedrals said: “King John could surely never have anticipated the enduring global legacy of Magna Carta when he agreed to its terms in 1215.
“Eight hundred years later, the international interest and excitement about this unification event is testament to the extraordinary significance and symbolic power of these four manuscripts.”
It is believed about 250 copies of the original manuscript were created and sent to legal and religious officials across the country to make sure it was carried out.
Seventeen of these copies are known to have survived.
January 30, 2015
International Slavery Museum Presents ‘Our Modern Magna Carta’
To commemorate the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta Our Modern Magna Carta at the International Slavery Museum aims to get to the heart of what democracy means for young people living in today’s globalised world. The project will help to develop behavioural change and instil global citizenship in young people by enhancing their awareness and knowledge of key themes centred on human rights with a strong link to Magna Carta: What does it mean to be free? What is democracy? How do we preserve liberty in the world today?
During 2015, our key project activities will include the delivery of a Teach the Teacher study day in partnership with the University of Liverpool, the launch and creation of a young people’s Magna Carta – Our Modern Magna Carta, displayed at the International Slavery Museum’s Dr Martin Luther King Building, and a Liverpool Schools Parliament debate as part of National Parliament Week in November.
The project will bring together young people to explore issues relating to the meaning of freedom, democracy and liberty. It will provide opportunities for civic engagement encouraging young people to act as decision makers and take action at both an individual and community level.
For the full article, click here.
January 29, 2015
Magna Carta to go on trial in Bradford’s historic law courts
Theatre companies Mind the Gap and Freedom Studios will run an exciting, collaborative project involving 20 young people from Bradford to commemorate the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta. This core group will involve 100 other young people drawn from schools and community groups and take over Bradford’s historic law courts. This fun, interactive and engaging experience will put the Magna Carta “on trial” to share with young people the extraordinary story and legacy of this historic and globally important document.
Lasers help reveal clues behind King John’s lost treasure
BBC News, 29th January 2015
‘Legend has it that crown jewels, gold and money were lost in the medieval mud of the fens in 1216.
It was the year after the Magna Carta was sealed, the country was in revolt and King John was having to quell rebellion uprisings. He had been travelling from the port of King’s Lynn to Lincoln when, according to historical chronicles, the treasure was lost.
It has since become one of the most sought after hoards in the country.
Now, clues about the disappearance of King John’s treasure have been unearthed in a “game changing” archaeological survey, according to historian and archaeologist Ben Robinson.
“These images show in remarkable detail the way the landscape has changed radically since King John’s time,” says Mr Robinson, who has been investigating the route for the BBC’s The Journey of the Magna Carta King.
“Our view now of straight roads and rectangular fields in the fens is not reflective of the landscape the king had to travel through.”
These latest images have been created by a system called LIDAR – Light Detection and Ranging – which uses a combination of lasers and GPS data.’
Magna Carta Musical Includes 200 Young Singers
Magna Cantata is a brand new children’s musical that has been devised to tell the story of Magna Carta, making it accessible for children and adults alike.
The performance has been designed for a chorus of around 200 young singers over four nights with different local schools participating each night. Children will contribute their thoughts about a modern day charter of rights as part of the performance.
Involving school children in such a high profile project and venue will give the Magna Cantata great prominence and ensure the support and involvement of the children’s families. For many, it will be their first experience of such an event, and the audience will gain in their knowledge and understanding of Magna Carta. The work will then be available to schools more widely as a free resource to perform their own school-based version.
For the full story, click here.
January 28, 2015
Society of Antiquaries to Host “Magna Carta Through the Ages” Exhibition
Magna Carta Through the Ages will make a significant contribution to the 800th anniversary celebrations of the sealing of Magna Carta by hosting a free exhibition of the Society’s three exceptional copies. They will be exhibited at Burlington House from 26th May – 31 July 2015. The copies include:-
- A version of the 1215 Magna Carta found in a 13th century cartulary of Peterborough Abbey known as the Black Book of Peterborough.
- A unique copy of the 1225 reissue of Magna Carta probably made at Halesowen Abbey. This is a revision issued by Henry III, which represents the final form as later confirmed and enshrined in English law, with 47 clauses instead of the original 63.
- An early 14th century collection of Statutes of the Realm, including a copy of the 1225 reissue of Magna Carta and the 1225 Charter of the Forest.
The exhibition and programme, linking these stories together, will explore Magna Carta as the creation of people who could not imagine a kingdom without a king, but who were driven to the point of rebellion because of a king’s misrule. It will also examine how the Charter was re-issued and re-interpreted through the 13th and 14th centuries and the part that antiquaries have played in the process of reinterpreting the charters significance from the 17th to 20th centuries.
For the full story, click here.
Hay Festival 2015: Kazuo Ishiguro’s new book, and a Magna Carta event with Stephen Fry
The Telegraph, 28 Jan 2015
Martin Chilton
‘Michael Morpurgo, Jacqueline Wilson and Kazuo Ishiguro are among three of the literary stars who will be appearing at the 2015 Hay Festival.
The Hay Festival, whose UK newspaper partner is the Telegraph Media Group, is Britain’s leading festival of ideas and is celebrating its 27th year.
Morpurgo, the author of War Horse, will be looking at the issue of how Jewish prisoners in the concentration camps were forced to play Mozart while Booker Prize-winning The Remains of the Day author Ishiguro talks about his forthcoming novel The Buried Giant.
In the year celebrating the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta – which will be marked in 20 different events – Festival president Stephen Fry and guests will consider which rights the public want to fight for in the 21st century.
The first tickets will be available to Hay Festival earlybird patrons from today and open to public booking from Thursday 22 January.
Among the other confirmed early announcement of featured artists are historian Antony Beevor, religious scholar Karen Armstrong and writer and campaigner Germaine Greer.’
January 26, 2015
Magna Carta: where to visit the four surviving originals
The Independent Travel, 26th January 2015
Harriet O’Brien
How astonishingly neat. If utilitarian. Given the importance of the document in front of me, I had expected some ornamentation – a flamboyant drop capital letter at least. Yet Magna Carta has no such artistic flourishes. Back in 1215, were the scribes in too much of a hurry?
They were producing several copies (at least 13, say medieval experts, possibly as many as 40) of a charter so radical that these needed to be despatched in something of a rush. For all the probable haste, though, the beautifully rendered Latin text of Magna Carta at Salisbury Cathedral shows no slips of handwriting, no blots in the brown ink (made, I learnt, from oak gall). I peered in baffled fascination at the density of the calligraphy, and at the twirls and horizontal marks that are a complex code of abbreviations.
Sunlight filtered through the windows of the cathedral’s Chapter House, where Magna Carta is displayed, adding a magical touch as I took in this modest-looking single sheet of parchment. It seems a feat of orthographical wizardry that 63 clauses are crammed in here, among them a groundbreaking stricture imposing limits on the king’s authority, and the trail-blazing injunction that no man can be imprisoned, outlawed, or dispossessed except “by judgement of his equals or the law of the land”. The latter has, of course, become a bedrock notion for human rights more or less across the world.
The manuscript at Salisbury Cathedral is the best preserved of four surviving original copies of Magna Carta, which were written up shortly after a beleaguered King John met and agreed terms with 25 rebellious barons at Runnymede meadow in Surrey on 15 June 1215. Two of the others are housed in the British Library in London while one is held at Lincoln.
At least that’s normally the case. In a few days’ time, all four copies will be on display together. On 3 February a unique exhibition takes place at the British Library, open only to selected academics or those who won a ticket in a ballot held last year. But never mind if you’re not invited to the party, for in Magna Carta’s 800th anniversary year there are a host of commemorations open to all. After the one-off, four-document display is over, the British Library will open a tremendous public exhibition about Magna Carta. The Salisbury and Lincoln manuscripts will be returned to their home bases – in both cases to state-of-the-art new exhibition spaces. In addition, a great parade of talks and performances begins across the country, relating to the 1215 Magna Carta and to later versions housed at Durham, Oxford, Hereford and elsewhere.
To read the full article in the Independent Travel, click here
Curry Mallet to Benefit from Magna Carta Grant
Curry Mallet Parish Council is very pleased to receive confirmation from the Chairman of the Magna Carta 800th Anniversary Committee that it has been awarded a grant of £4,450 towards its own anniversary celebrations this year.
The Magna Carta Trust’s 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee is charged by the Magna Carta Trust to co-ordinate activities, raise the profile of the anniversary and deliver a number of key national and international aspirations. For more information visit www.magnacarta800th.com
Magna Carta is the foundation stone supporting the freedoms enjoyed by nearly two billion people in over 100 countries. Magna Carta enshrined the Rule of Law. It limited the power of authoritarian rule, the ‘divine right of kings’, and it paved the way for trial by jury, modified through the ages as the franchise was extended. The original Great Charter was agreed by King John on 15th June 1215 when he acceded to barons’ and bishops’ demands to limit his powers and directed that it be sealed. This version of Magna Carta was revised several times in the 13th Century. The 1297 version became part of English law. William Malet, Lord of the Manor of Curry Mallet, was one of those 25 rebel barons present at Runnymede in June 1215 to ensure King John sealed The Great Charter.
Curry Mallet Magna Carta 800 is a committee of the Parish Council set up to work alongside the Primary School, Church and local community to formulate plans for activities and events in 2015. Since inception in 2013 additional projects and events have been initiated by the Primary School requiring additional funding but which will give a more rounded experience for everyone. These include temporary employment of artists, workshops with teachers and children, costumes for a pageant and choral performance, transport to events, materials and associated cost for projects. Curry Mallet is a very small village and the Magna Carta 800th anniversary will have a tremendous impact leaving an enduring legacy. Historical projects like this are invaluable to local communities, especially rural ones, whose important history often goes unrecorded and unacknowledged.
Commenting on the award, Lionel Frazer, Chairman of the Parish Council said: “It’s wonderful that we have been awarded this grant towards our celebrations and are extremely grateful to the Magna Carta Trust. We love where we live and know there’s so much more to discover about our past. We are all really excited about passing on our findings and sharing our history.”
January 23, 2015
Barnes Music Festivals; Magna Carta and the Arts
The Magna Carta 800th Anniversary Committee has awarded a grant of £5,000 for the Barnes Magna Carta Festivals in 2015. These two festivals, the Barnes Music Festival in March and the St Mary’s Magna Carta Festival in May, mark the 800th anniversary of the visit of Archbishop Stephen Langton to Barnes on his return from the Magna Carta sealing at Runnymede to consecrate St Mary’s Church Barnes.
The Barnes Music Festival from 14 to 29 March 2015 has the theme “Magna Carta, Music and Freedom”. It brings together local musicians with internationally-recognised artists and includes orchestral, instrumental, choral and jazz music. There will be both medieval music and a wide variety of genres which interpret the legacy of Magna Carta on musical freedom and artistic expression. It is organised jointly by community organisations The Friends of St Mary’s Barnes, Barnes Community Association, Barnes Music Society and Barnes Choir. There are 21 events planned over the fortnight at seven locations in Barnes, centred on St Mary’s.
The St Mary’s Barnes Magna Carta Festival from 19 to 24 May 2015 will feature spectacular flower displays, embroidery exhibitions, a history display, lectures and a workshop. It is organised by St Mary’s Barnes in conjunction with the Barnes Community Association and will have active involvement from local schools and other community groups including Churches Together in Barnes.
For more information contact [email protected]
January 22, 2015
Heritage of Magna Carta linked to Modern Human Rights
A programme of events is being organised by the Human Rights Office for the week of the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta: 15th – 19th June 2015 with the support of the Magna Carta Trust’s 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee. The Magna Carta Trust’s 800th Anniversary Commemoration Committee is charged by the Magna Carta Trust to co-ordinate activities, raise the profile of the anniversary and deliver a number of key national and international aspirations.
The purpose of the Magna Carta 800 Years Conference (Medway) is to link the heritage of the Magna Carta to our human and civil rights today. The Magna Carta was a peace treaty between King John and the rebelling barons. It was not meant as a lasting declaration of rights and legal principles. But the concessions the king had to give and the rights he had to recognise reveal an underlying principle: those in a position of power cannot maintain absolute power over others for ever, nor at all costs. This is why the Magna Carta can be considered as a root document for our human and civil rights to this day.
The Magna Carta will be considered from various perspectives: History, Law (both theory and practice), Philosophy, Humanism, Education, Discrimination, Freedom of Expression, Workers’ Rights, Religion, Politics; Locally, Nationally and Internationally.
Venue: Ward Room, University of Greenwich, Medway Campus, Pembroke 226, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB.
Monday 15 June and Tuesday 16 June: Main Conference in the Ward Room
Wednesday 17 June and Thursday 18 June: Workshops in the Syndicate Room
Friday 19 June: NGO Market and Historic Tours. Exhibition all week.
For more information:
Visit www.magnacarta800medway.org or contact [email protected]
This project is also endorsed by the British Humanist Association.
The Human Rights Office conducts research projects for use in practice. For more information visit www.humanrightsoffice.org.
January 21, 2015
The January Parliament and how it defined Britain
The Telegraph, 20th January 2015 – BBC Democracy Day
‘Simon de Montfort called together knights and burgesses 750 years ago – creating the first Parliament of elected representatives.
The January Parliament, 750 years ago, was the first time elected representatives came together on behalf of their local communities. As such, it marked a defining moment in the evolution of British politics.
The gathering, on 20 January 1265, brought together knights and burgesses from all around the country, setting the foundations of the House of Parliament.
The politics leading up to the January Parliament were complex, but the key moment came eight months earlier when the French-born noble Simon de Montfort captured King Henry III at the Battle of Lewes. Henry’s heir – the future Edward I – was also captured.
As a counterpoint to Henry’s perceived misrule, de Montfort – who was the 6th Earl of Leicester – ordered each county to elect two knights, while each borough elected two burgesses and two aldermen. The resulting Parliament discussed a wide range of political issues.
However, in an ending that should keep every parliamentarian on their toes, De Montfort soon came to be seen as overbearing – seizing too much power and influence. He was killed in the Battle of Evesham in August 1965.’
To read more from the Telegraph, click here
Parliament commemorates Magna Carta with films on the Tube
Marketing Magazine, 21st January, 2015.
‘The Houses of Parliament are broadcasting a series of short educational videos at London Underground stations to commemorate the anniversaries of the Simon de Montfort Parliament and the sealing of Magna Carta.
The short hand-drawn animations have been created in collaboration with Cognitive Media to highlight important moments in the history of the UK Parliament. The series begins today.
It is the 750th anniversary of the Simon de Montfort Parliament, which first sat on 20 January 1265, and the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta, which took place on 15 June 1215.
New content will be revealed every Wednesday for 12 weeks on Exterion Media’s cross track projection digital screens.’
January 20, 2015
Did King John actually ‘sign’ Magna Carta?
The BBC, 20th January 2015 (Democracy Day)
‘The Royal Mint has been criticised for featuring a picture of King John signing Magna Carta with a quill on a coin celebrating its 800th anniversary. A wax seal was actually used, but does the mistake really matter, asks Justin Parkinson?
The £2 coin shows King John holding Magna Carta in one hand and a large quill in another. The meaning is obvious – he signed it.
Actually, he didn’t. John, like other medieval monarchs, used the Great Seal to put his name to the document, making concessions to England’s barons in 1215, following years of arguments over royal power.
The Royal Mint has been accused of making a “schoolboy error”. Historian Marc Morris stated that medieval kings “did not authenticate documents by signing them” but “by sealing them”.
The Mint has defended itself by saying the scene shown on the coin is not meant to give a “literal account of what actually occurred”.’
January 15, 2015
Free Speech and Magna Carta
The New Yorker, 15th January 2015
‘In an eleven-minute video, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has claimed credit for the Charlie Hebdo massacre, calling it “a new turning point in the history of confrontation.” The video also cited Osama bin Laden’s warning “If there is no check on the freedom of your words, then let your heart be open to the freedom of our actions.” After a week’s worth of grim news from Paris, I sought refuge at the Library of Congress. There, in a small exhibit, is the Magna Carta, in Washington now to mark the eight-hundredth anniversary of its signing.
The Great Charter, as it translates from Latin—so named for the large size of the parchment rather than the lofty principles it espouses—is a single sheet with fifty-four lines of small lettering. The parchment is frail and a bit faded, its royal seal disintegrated. It was drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury and brought before King John on behalf of forty English barons, demanding rights and property. On June 15, 1215, in a meadow at Runnymede, the King signed it.
The document was initially a failure. It was annulled by the Pope after just ten weeks. The reforms that the King had agreed to, in order to quell a revolt, were abandoned. A temporary truce was quickly shattered. War erupted. But its premises couldn’t be ignored or defeated by force or intimidation. A year later, the regency of Henry III signed a slightly less radical version, which was reaffirmed by monarchs some forty-four times in the course of the next two hundred years.
The Magna Carta actually did less—indeed, a lot less—than is widely believed. Several of its sixty-three chapters (some just a couple of sentences) express small grievances with the feudal system or with ways of life peculiar to the early thirteenth century. Its concerns range from control of the forests to river navigation and scarcity of cash to pay debts.’
Categories