The commemoration of the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta at Runnymede on 15 June 2015 was attended by Her Majesty the Queen and other members of the royal family, the archbishop of Canterbury, the Prime Minister, the United States attorney general and a host of other guests and onlookers. Indeed the celebrations have reached far beyond academic circles and far beyond England. Historians of the thirteenth century enjoy unwonted celebrity status; scholarly books published in the anniversary year are pitched to appeal to wide audiences 1 and the websites of the Magna Carta Trust, 2 the British Library 3 and The National Archives 4 use a combination of texts, illustrations and video clips to bring this justly famous document and the circumstances of its making to global audiences. The anniversary has inspired creativity of many kindsâplays, 5 childrenâs books, a television series, 6 even songs, all showing how the celebration of âheritageâ has become a social phenomenon. The commemorations have engaged with the myths surrounding Magna Carta; indeed, these, and the commemorative events themselves and the ways in which we communicate about them, have become a part of Magna Cartaâs history, creating as they do a record of how the Charter has been and is perceived to be relevant and precious today, in England, Europe and the wider world.
The grantor of this great charter, King John, lies in the choir of Worcester cathedral. His tomb and effigy suggest a king reconciled with his maker, prompting us to consider the nature of Johnâs relations with the Church. Accordingly this chapter examines Johnâs personal piety; the sacred nature of kingship as proclaimed in Magna Carta; the role of churchmen in counselling the king; and the issue of elections and the interdict. We examine the legacy of Magna Carta, in terms of elections and more generally in terms of ecclesiastical patronageâthe kingâs own and those of the nobility.
Thirteenth-century chroniclers are at the root of Johnâs personal reputation which, despite the efforts of historians focussing on administrative rather than narrative sources to cast him in a favourable light, has generally tended to be poor. 7 Perhaps most damning was the couplet by a âcertain reprobate poetâ which the monk of St Albans, Matthew Paris, inserted in his chronicle to the effect that John befouled Hell itself. His own rather pious wish of course was that some good deed done during his life would speak on his behalf before the tribunal of Jesus Christ and he went on to speak of Johnâs building of Beaulieu abbey and his dying gift of land to Croxton abbey. 8 Johnâs foundation of the Cistercian house of Beaulieu in 1204 was, indeed, said to be an act of contrition for his persecution of the Cistercians. 9
John was genuinely devoted to certain English saints, visiting the shrines of three (St Thomas, St Alban and St Edmund), straight after his coronation. 10 The contemporary description of his visit to Bury St Edmunds is specially telling because the engaging Jocelin of Brakelond is narrating a story about Johnâs meanness, not about his piety. The monks were hoping for a generous gift but were disappointed for all he did was return a silk cloth (which his servants had borrowed anyway from the monks) and to make a modest cash present. Jocelin deplored the kingâs taking St Edmundâs hospitality without offering much in return; but he let slip that John had come as a consequence of a vow and having a special devotion to St Edmund; and the 13 s which he did give were offered during the Mass on the last day of the visit. 11
Finally, it seems to have been Johnâs devotion to St Wulfstan which was the main reason why he was laid to rest inWorcester. He was the first of his dynasty to be buried in England (his parents, brother and later his wife were buried at Fontevrault), and the first king to be buried in an English cathedral since William Rufus, who was hastily interred at Winchester in 1100. 12 John, in his last days before his death at Crowland abbey, left a testament indicating his wish to be buried at Worcester in the church of Blessed Mary and St Wulfstan, although his earlier intention had been that he be interred in a Cistercian house of his foundation. 13 Johnâs interest in Wulfstan was not, however, purely personal; he enlisted (somewhat obliquely) the story of how Wulfstan had refused to give up his bishopric of Worcester to William the Conqueror and had instead fixed it in the tomb of Edward the Confessor who had given it to him. Only St Wulfstan could remove it. 14
There is a contradiction at the heart of Magna Carta. It was a royal charterâan affirmation of the kingâs right to make grants that no other person or institution could. There were sections of the Charter that affirmed royal authority or even (especially in the reissues) took it to new levels .Indeed the thirteenth century was a period in which the Crown claimed as never before that there were certain rights which it was its special prerogative to give. Yet, at the same time, Magna Carta was wrested from a king whose relationships with his barons had broken down so utterly that he was forced to make concessions that struck at the core of his monarchical and lordly power. Magna Carta needed to codify law and custom because John had disregarded them. At a time when it was becoming increasingly desirable to be in possession of âmunimentsââwritten evidence of titleâit was necessary to embody the whole communityâs libertiesâor the limitations on royal powerâin a written document. In fact the thirteenth century was a period in which a number of European rulers granted charters of liberties to their subjects. For example, the Statute of Pamiers was granted in 1212 by Simon de Montfort, leader of the crusade against the Albigensian heretics, to establish laws for the crusader state of Toulouse. 15
The preamble to the Charter recognised the kingâs rule under God and addressed the influential in the kingdom, both ecclesiastical and secular, and the hierarchy of royal ministers 16 :
John, by the grace of God, king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, count of Anjou, to his archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, foresters, sheriffs, reeves, ministers, and all his bailiffs and faithful men, greeting.
The charter proceeded to explain the kingâs motives and intent:
inspired by God and for the salvation of our soul, and for the souls of all our ancestors and heirs, for the honour of God and the exaltation of holy church, and the reform of our kingdom.
Thus the preamble affirmed the sacred nature of medieval kingship and associated the spiritual standing of the king with the political state of his realm. The idea was not of course new, but Johnâs reign had experienced the harsh realities of the link in the period of the interdict which Pope Innocent III had imposed on England in 1208. The interdictâspiritual sanctions on a country or region, depriving its inhabitants of the benefits of the sacraments of the Church (with some few exceptions) had been imposed because of Johnâs refusal to accept Stephen Langton as archbishop of Canterbury. Indeed, the political messages in the popeâs letters, which form a uniquely valuable source for our understanding of the relationships between England and the papacy in this crucial period, use spiritual language throughoutâthat of the spiritual father correcting the transgressions of a wayward but much beloved son â in order to persuade him to return to the path of political obedience. The sphere of spiritual authorityâthe boundary to the popeâs power over himâwas, of course, precisely the issue. According to the Burton annals, John, when meeting with the papal legates at Northampton in 1211, told them:
I admit that the lord pope is my spiritual father, and that he is in the place of Blessed Peter, and that I must obey him, that is, in spiritual matters; but in earthly things which belong to my crown, never. 17
The very layout of Magna Carta symbolises the difficulties of drawing those boundaries: its first main clause granted the Church its liberties and thus appeared to treat the clergy separately from the rest. Between the clause granting liberty to the Church was another brief preamble introducing the liberties of all free men, as though these were another category entirely. Yet, bishops and abbots were great landowners under the Crown and owed military service to the king. Clauses in Magna Carta affecting landowners affected them too. Clause 60 of the charter required all men, both clerks and laymen, to observe the liberties granted in Magna Carta towards their own men; and clause 62 pardoned all the âill will, indignation and rancourâ between the king and his men, clerk and lay. 18 And the archbishops and bishops named in the preamble, and Mast...