He had to sign it to see what was in it
The lesson: Tyrants only obey oaths when there is real and credible force to back it up. Claire Wolf, our awkward time is almost over.
While the current administration is trying to eradicate the remaining vestiges found within the Constitution.
Nobody would ever want a Plantagenet as a next door neighbor. WhT a bad bunch
What would have happened if Richard had executed his brother John for his treason, instead of forgiving him? Would Richard’s successor(s) have agreed to and complied with the barons’ demands in 1215? Just a thought.
Our “Declaration of Independence and Constitution” were on the ragged edge of life support for some time after 1776 too. (Still are as a matter of fact) Freedom is not a given anywhere on this planet.
How’d that work out?
BTT
Interestingly, there have been no subsequent King Johns of England. Although Portugal had a few kings named John, the name isn’t very popular for kings, even though quite a few popes had that name.
King John after signing the Magna Carta is like Obama after the 2014 elections.
Screw them both.
"Though in form a free grant of liberties, the charter had really been won from John at the sword's point. It could not in any sense be looked upon as an act of legislation. He had accepted the terms demanded by the barons, but he would do so only so long as he was compelled to. He had already taken measures to acquire both juridical and physical weapons against his enemies by appealing to the pope, and sending abroad for mercenary troops. By a Bull dated August 24 at Anagni, Innocent III revoked the charter and later on excommunicated the rebellious barons.
"The motives of Innocent's action are not far to seek. To begin with, he was probably misled as to the facts, and trusted too much to the king's account of what had happened. He was naturally inclined to protect the interests of a professed crusader and a vassal, and he took up the position that the barons could not be judges in their own cause but should have referred the matter to him for arbitration. But, more than this, he maintained quite correctly that the king had made the concessions under compulsion, and that the barons were in open rebellion against the Crown." --The Catholic Encyclopedia
Another Pope against freedom.
Wasn’t it the Barons who brought in the prince of France and his army to fight John, and then turned on him when once John was dead?
Wow, so this is how our ruling elites long ago learned to quell the masses with myths of fairness.
He’s supposed to be my 22nd great-grandfather....big scumbag that he was.
https://archive.org/search.php?query=The%20History%20of%20England%20%20David%20Hume