Talk:Magna Carta

Harvard Law Library Magna Carta

Today's edit incorrectly states that the Harvard Law Library version is a 1215 original. It has indeed been confirmed as an original rather than a copy but is an original from 1300 (when the Magna Carta was reissued in an amended form) and the source cited says this. Khunanup (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Exactly. Will all editors who have contributed to this please re-read the two sources cited by Richard Slater below. Nobody is claiming that the Harvard copy is an original exemplification of 1215: Carpenter and Vincent are arguing (though with due scholarly caution) that it appears to be an original of Edward I's confirmation of 1300. I am revering all recent edits on this. GrindtXX (talk) 13:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

mea culpa, I was misled by the Guardian article MatthewVernon (talk) 22:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry – I haven't reverted all edits, but I have reverted those that incorrectly claim it is an original of 1215. GrindtXX (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Khunanup (talk) 13:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

need to change this line too: "Only two exemplifications of Magna Carta are held outside England, both from 1297." 2003:E8:E72D:5610:A9C2:8B4B:2CB2:D2D3 (talk) 16:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

OK: I have fixed that line, and made some other minor corrections and adjustments. GrindtXX (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Not a great deal of " due scholarly caution" when they appeared on BBC News at Six tonight, see: [1]. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Harvard Law School "Copy"

This article has recently been updated with some details about the Harvard Laws School "Copy", the page now reads as if the four copies of the original 1215 issue held by the British Library, Salisbury Cathedral and Lincon Cathedral have a fifth original. The original source materials seem to have been updated to reflect the assertion that the version held by Harvard Law School.

• "Harvard Law School’s ‘copy’ of Magna Carta revealed as original" (Harvard Law School) [2]
• "Harvard’s unofficial copy of Magna Carta is actually an original, experts say" (The Guardian) [3]

I lack subject matter expertise in this area, and can't immediately see a clean way to update the article to affect this change in provenance. -- RichardSlater ^(About) / _(Talk) 12:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The Harvard story (and all of the reporting stemming from it) is unfortunately very vaguely worded and fails to clarify that there were several earlier issues of the Charter, with (I think) four from 1215 and thirteen from 1216-1297 surviving. It is however explicit that it is "King Edward I's 1300 issue of Magna Carta".

However, one thing that's confusing me is exactly how many 1300 copies there are. Our article (as of yesterday), said:

Seven copies of the 1300 exemplification by Edward I survive, in Faversham, Oriel College, Oxford, the Bodleian Library, Durham Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, the City of London (held in the archives at the London Guildhall) and Sandwich (held in the Sandwich Guildhall Museum). The Sandwich copy was rediscovered in early 2015 in a Victorian scrapbook in the town archives of Sandwich, Kent, one of the Cinque Ports. In the case of the Sandwich and Oriel College exemplifications, the copies of the Charter of the Forest originally issued with them also survive.

With Harvard, that would make it eight today, and indeed the article currently has it as eight. But Harvard have it as "one of just seven" - so has one of the older ones since been discounted? Or has one been counted twice in our list? Andrew Gray (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Dug into this a little more today. There's an article by Nicholas Vincent in the TLS (20/2/15) where he talks about identifying the Sandwich one, which gives a lot of background on the process of finding these - https://www.the-tls.co.uk/history/medieval-history/in-plain-view

Very interestingly, the end mentions a lead on a copy recorded in 1810 in Appleby but not traced since - the one that was announced this week! It notes that the Durham 1300 also has a matching Forest Charter, so there are three pairs not two. Unfortunately he is not specific about an overall number of 1300 copies, so no advance on 7 v 8.

He mentions a 2007 census of copies but it's not clear where this was published - it may have been in the book Sotheby's published alongside the 2007 sale? It would be useful to cite if it can be found, and might clear up the discrepancy. Andrew Gray (talk) 17:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2025

from:

It was displayed in San Francisco,

to:

It was displayed, 7 May 2011 through 5 June 2011, at the Legion of Honor in San Francisco, from the Bodleian Library, with an English translation,

2601:646:203:E7B0:B8AD:DE20:D02C:535E (talk) 20:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I think "It was displayed in San Francisco," is from the section about the 1215 Lincoln copy. The date for that exhibition isn't clear but from this talk seems to have been sometime in the mid-70s ("In 1976 it was placed in the Cathedral’s medieval library. This move was funded by generous donations from the United States. Magna Carta had been brought over to San Francisco for a month through the sponsorship of the Union Bank.")

The 2011 exhibition was one of the 1217 Bodleian copies, and this is already mentioned & cited a couple of paragraphs below ("One of the Bodleian's copies was displayed at San Francisco's California Palace of the Legion of Honor in 2011."), so I think this is already covered. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Six versions of Magna Carta

According to Faversham Charters & Magna Carta Exhibition, there are 6 versions of Magna Carta, the last one being the 1300 version that HLS library held. However, the current article doesn't make it clear that there are six versions, and the 1300 one is the last version. Only five versions are clearly stated in TOC. I suggest to update it to make it six. Happyseeu (talk) 17:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

I may be missing something, but the article does indeed mention all six, corresponding to those listed in the Faversham link you provided: 1215, 1216, 1217, 1225, 1297 and 1300. Can you point out where correction is needed? MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:27, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Looking at it again, the 1297 section has a couple of sections on 1297 and then moves straight into "With the reconfirmation of the charters in 1300...". The post-1300 reconfirmations are then dealt with very quickly in a later section ("reconfirmed 32 times according to Sir Edward Coke, and possibly as many as 45 times").

So it's a little odd - the article treats 1297 as the last one significant enough for a specific heading, but 1300 as the last one notable enough to discuss individually in detail and also the last one where the individual copies are notable. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

For completeness I've added a 1300 subsection heading. The whole thing could do with a review, though. MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Correct order of Clauses?

A small research projects has shown that clause 25 is about weights and measures not clause 35. Statute Law Revision Act 1948 pg.6 This translation of Magna Carta, by the national archives has fewer clauses and shows that clause 25 is about weights and measure 62.232.178.242 (talk) 20:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

The US National Archives translation is of the 1297 one that they have a copy of - note that the preamble begins "Edward by the grace of God King of England, lord of Ireland...", so it must date to the reign of King Edward. The Statute Law Revision Act is repealing the version that exists in English law, which is also the 1297 version.

The numbers given in the article are for the original 1215 version of the Charter, which included a large number of clauses that were removed in later versions.

So the weights and measures clause was originally #35; after some of the intervening ones were removed, it became #25 in the later version, and that is the one that has passed into law and later got repealed. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2025

NO MENTION OF THE BELOW INFORMATION IS MADE IN THE HISTORY SECTION DESCRIBING THE 1216 MAGNA CARTA (ISSUED BY HENRY'S REGENCY) Can we please include this? There is only one surviving copy, at Durham:

When the 1215 Magna Carta was declared null and void, the result was civil war. Events changed when King John suddenly died in October 1216, and his nine-year-old son was declared King Henry III (1216-1272).

Henry’s regency government, led by William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke (1147-1219), and Cardinal Guala Bicchieri (1150-1227), moved quickly to secure his throne and peace by offering a new version of Magna Carta. Henry was not old enough to have his own great seal, so the document was issued in his name but with the seals of Marshal and Bicchieri, in November 1216.

Durham Cathedral has the only surviving issue of the 1216 Magna Carta. Its seals are missing, but the text states it was sealed by William Marshal and Cardinal Bicchieri, acting as regents on behalf of the young King Henry III.

Source: https://www.durhamcathedral.co.uk/explore/treasures-collections/our-most-famous-items/magna-carta-and-the-charter-of-the-forest 188.39.84.242 (talk) 19:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "no mention is made ...". I see the second paragraph of the lead beginning "After John's death, the regency government of his young son, Henry III, reissued the document in 1216 ..."; a 3-paragraph subsection under History headed Great Charter of 1216; and a sentence in the Later exemplifications subsection reading "Only one exemplification of the 1216 charter survives, held in Durham Cathedral." Please explain what information you think is missing. GrindtXX (talk) 20:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)