Sorry Ken, I'm not with you on this post. You left too much out and obfuscated other parts. I happen to really enjoy Medieval History, especially British and have read extensively. The Magna Carta is interesting in that not only does it lay down the rights of the landed gentry and nobles, it also spells what the nobles ad gentry owe to the king. On addition, it also sets standards of measurement of goods and commerce.
And we do have a voice in our democratic Representative Republic if we choose to use it. Being a political animal I have written and currently emailed my political representatives. I have been doing this since February 1967 when I became a Naturalized Citizen. I don't always get what I want, but I do get a response and an explanation.
I also attended town halls, coffee klatches, worked during campaigns for people I supported. Democracy isn't free. If you aren't willing to put in the effort to write, email, attend meetings, protest marches, knock on doors, and any other activity to get what you want, then you really don't have the right to complain. No, I don't do all of that anymore. I'm going on 91 and am pretty damned decrepit. The only thing I do now is email and send very small contributions to people I trust. But from 1964 (before I was a citizen) until 2017 I did all the above. I no longer drive so getting to meetings is difficult and expensive. But I figure I put my time in while my body was willing to support me.
I am not quite sure where you are disagreeing. Certainly it is an abbreviated history of the struggle to enforce or more practical. John had no intention to fulfill the promises he made in 1215 and so in 1217 they brought it back and had him sign it again. For the next 180 years (almost) there was a constant battle to get the kings to heed to its tenants. What I am suggesting was that it was a struggle to insure the kings granted rights to citizens and by the continual struggle the seeds of democracy. I don't think there was one magic moment in 1215 when it was born but people always have to fight and be vigilent to maintain freedom. I thought it relevant today when so many are again attempting to take away freedoms to review how difficult it was to obtain. Please tell me where you believe I am in error, it seems I am certainly in agreement with your response. Maybe I failed to convey what I was attempting to convey,.
You are correct, John was ever a liar, a coward, and not a very nice human being, In fact Trump reminds me a lot of John, an egoist, womanizer, cruel, treacherous and an inveterate liar. He went so far as to offer England as a serfdom of the Pope in return for the Pope overturning the Magna Carta. Given the time and condition of all Europe including Great Britain, democracy as we think of it was never even discussed. There were kings, noblemen, tradesmen, merchants, and serfs who were essentially slaves in that they were agricultural workers whose produce was given to their overlord and a meager amount left for them. They were forbidden to hunt, trap, or enter the "kings forests" The Magna Carta as I said (and I do have a translated copy of it) laid out what the noblemen owed the king and what the king owed his subjects. But it also, gave limited protection to wives and daughters of the noblemen. As well as a stated and enforced system of measurement. Henry II BTW, introduced the Star Courts which were sort of like our circuit courts of today. He was a stickler for laws. The one thing I do when I'm reading historical reports is visualize the actions and mores in the state of the country as it was then, not compared to what we do and think now.
Yes, I didn't mention, but I do know about his attempts to deal with Innocent III. I believe I mentioned that Henry II started the foundations of common law. If I didn't I apologize, because this was pulled from a much longer writing but it is too long for substack. Henry could be extremely ruthless, but he was also a gifted politician, a quality his son totally lacked. It might, in the end have actually been beneficial that he wasn't. What Henry had established was embedded into the lords and their struggle for rights eventually led to the first "people's house of government" several centuries before anywhere else. The low countries I believe, was next ,after the revolt from Spain, but I believe that wasn't for a couple of centuries. So in some ways, John's obstinance led to the beginnings of English democracy. And yes the relevance to Trump was not lost on me, although his appeal I don't believe is related.
Thank you, now I agree. I'm glad to know someone else interested in this era. My husband I took a three week road trip through England Wales and Scotland. I was able to tour several castles before my poor husband became bored to death, so we hit a few country pubs in between.
When I finally went to college I was quite lucky in my selection. I went there because they were near my Indiana home, and at first was accepted only provisionally. But after doing two or three classes a year, for the first few years, they worked out a program for me so I could accelerate and complete my work mostly on my own. So the last 4 semesters (of credit) were independent research projects on subjects they did not offer. I ostensibly was under the direct guidance of one of our professors but they also arranged me to work with a professor from other universities who were "specialists in the field." and actually supervised the work. It was kind of like four post-grad projects and they were all on the development of Christian theory from the patristic era (actually last) through the first century of the reformation. One, naturally, was the scholastic era which was a nine-month project where I was able to access facsimilies of many medieval manuscripts. So medieval history was relevant to understanding the settings for much of the philosophical (theological) development. I think some years later I read one of Barbara Tuchman's books, but most of my thoughts on the era were formulated through reading the Latin, Nouormand (modern Normand), and with some difficulty Old English sources. Of course by the time of John, middle English was taking root and that was somewhat easier. So when you first wrote I was misinterpreting the era, I was a little alarmed because I am not well versed on modern scholarship of the era.
I envy your tour though. I did go to London for a weekend in my last year of high school,, and when my mother finally left my father I went back to Germany for a several months and went to the Isle of Wight festival in the summer of '70 just before returning to the states. But I always wanted to return to Europe and visit northern England Scotland but after '70, I have never left the continental US with the exception of multiple trips to Mexico when I lived for eight years in Yuma. (Actually daily trips, I rented a place in Los Algodones and crossed daily.) I suppose one of my regrets is that I never did have the resources to travel outside of US again.
Thank you, Ken. You certainly did have an interesting and informative college career. I think I told you I was born in Canada and lived there until age 25. I married an American and moved to Florida (which I hated) and finally in 1961 to California, I dropped out of high school at age 16 so I was largely self taught, I read all the great philosophers and some history. I started college when I was 31 at the Community College with declared major in history, and the purpose to become a teacher. It took only 2 semesters to realize I couldn't teach history. My two college professors were not only brilliant, they were stand up comedians. So, I changed majors to Political Science., Then I switched to pre-Law. I had been attending night school only because our two daughters and my husbands 2 sons from a previous marriage were young. When I received my AA, the college listed our majors beside our names. My husband was so angry he would not agree to let me continue college unless I went back to teaching as I had agreed. He was a Civil Engineer and felt that teaching was not a 'profession' but law was and therefor a challenge to him. So I switched again to Biology. In the spring of 1968 I entered University as a biology major with a chemistry minor. which I eventually changed to a second major. I started teaching in the spring of 1973 and finished up my Master Degree in Physiology in 1977 while I was still teaching full time. (I divorced that husband and had a wonderful second marriage)
The history is also self taught. I read constantly. As I said I am particularly interested in medieval history particularly of England, Scotland and Wales. I am more than 90% Scottish (per Ancestry DNA) so I've read a lot about Scottish history from Fergus (800 AD) through the diaspora of 1745. Many different interests.
Sorry Ken, I'm not with you on this post. You left too much out and obfuscated other parts. I happen to really enjoy Medieval History, especially British and have read extensively. The Magna Carta is interesting in that not only does it lay down the rights of the landed gentry and nobles, it also spells what the nobles ad gentry owe to the king. On addition, it also sets standards of measurement of goods and commerce.
And we do have a voice in our democratic Representative Republic if we choose to use it. Being a political animal I have written and currently emailed my political representatives. I have been doing this since February 1967 when I became a Naturalized Citizen. I don't always get what I want, but I do get a response and an explanation.
I also attended town halls, coffee klatches, worked during campaigns for people I supported. Democracy isn't free. If you aren't willing to put in the effort to write, email, attend meetings, protest marches, knock on doors, and any other activity to get what you want, then you really don't have the right to complain. No, I don't do all of that anymore. I'm going on 91 and am pretty damned decrepit. The only thing I do now is email and send very small contributions to people I trust. But from 1964 (before I was a citizen) until 2017 I did all the above. I no longer drive so getting to meetings is difficult and expensive. But I figure I put my time in while my body was willing to support me.
I am not quite sure where you are disagreeing. Certainly it is an abbreviated history of the struggle to enforce or more practical. John had no intention to fulfill the promises he made in 1215 and so in 1217 they brought it back and had him sign it again. For the next 180 years (almost) there was a constant battle to get the kings to heed to its tenants. What I am suggesting was that it was a struggle to insure the kings granted rights to citizens and by the continual struggle the seeds of democracy. I don't think there was one magic moment in 1215 when it was born but people always have to fight and be vigilent to maintain freedom. I thought it relevant today when so many are again attempting to take away freedoms to review how difficult it was to obtain. Please tell me where you believe I am in error, it seems I am certainly in agreement with your response. Maybe I failed to convey what I was attempting to convey,.
You are correct, John was ever a liar, a coward, and not a very nice human being, In fact Trump reminds me a lot of John, an egoist, womanizer, cruel, treacherous and an inveterate liar. He went so far as to offer England as a serfdom of the Pope in return for the Pope overturning the Magna Carta. Given the time and condition of all Europe including Great Britain, democracy as we think of it was never even discussed. There were kings, noblemen, tradesmen, merchants, and serfs who were essentially slaves in that they were agricultural workers whose produce was given to their overlord and a meager amount left for them. They were forbidden to hunt, trap, or enter the "kings forests" The Magna Carta as I said (and I do have a translated copy of it) laid out what the noblemen owed the king and what the king owed his subjects. But it also, gave limited protection to wives and daughters of the noblemen. As well as a stated and enforced system of measurement. Henry II BTW, introduced the Star Courts which were sort of like our circuit courts of today. He was a stickler for laws. The one thing I do when I'm reading historical reports is visualize the actions and mores in the state of the country as it was then, not compared to what we do and think now.
Yes, I didn't mention, but I do know about his attempts to deal with Innocent III. I believe I mentioned that Henry II started the foundations of common law. If I didn't I apologize, because this was pulled from a much longer writing but it is too long for substack. Henry could be extremely ruthless, but he was also a gifted politician, a quality his son totally lacked. It might, in the end have actually been beneficial that he wasn't. What Henry had established was embedded into the lords and their struggle for rights eventually led to the first "people's house of government" several centuries before anywhere else. The low countries I believe, was next ,after the revolt from Spain, but I believe that wasn't for a couple of centuries. So in some ways, John's obstinance led to the beginnings of English democracy. And yes the relevance to Trump was not lost on me, although his appeal I don't believe is related.
I published this earlier today on my other column. https://ken856.substack.com/p/the-constitutionality-of-secret-ballots?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
You may not agree, it may be totally irrational, but I am interested in your thoughts, necvertheless, if you care to share.
Thank you, now I agree. I'm glad to know someone else interested in this era. My husband I took a three week road trip through England Wales and Scotland. I was able to tour several castles before my poor husband became bored to death, so we hit a few country pubs in between.
When I finally went to college I was quite lucky in my selection. I went there because they were near my Indiana home, and at first was accepted only provisionally. But after doing two or three classes a year, for the first few years, they worked out a program for me so I could accelerate and complete my work mostly on my own. So the last 4 semesters (of credit) were independent research projects on subjects they did not offer. I ostensibly was under the direct guidance of one of our professors but they also arranged me to work with a professor from other universities who were "specialists in the field." and actually supervised the work. It was kind of like four post-grad projects and they were all on the development of Christian theory from the patristic era (actually last) through the first century of the reformation. One, naturally, was the scholastic era which was a nine-month project where I was able to access facsimilies of many medieval manuscripts. So medieval history was relevant to understanding the settings for much of the philosophical (theological) development. I think some years later I read one of Barbara Tuchman's books, but most of my thoughts on the era were formulated through reading the Latin, Nouormand (modern Normand), and with some difficulty Old English sources. Of course by the time of John, middle English was taking root and that was somewhat easier. So when you first wrote I was misinterpreting the era, I was a little alarmed because I am not well versed on modern scholarship of the era.
I envy your tour though. I did go to London for a weekend in my last year of high school,, and when my mother finally left my father I went back to Germany for a several months and went to the Isle of Wight festival in the summer of '70 just before returning to the states. But I always wanted to return to Europe and visit northern England Scotland but after '70, I have never left the continental US with the exception of multiple trips to Mexico when I lived for eight years in Yuma. (Actually daily trips, I rented a place in Los Algodones and crossed daily.) I suppose one of my regrets is that I never did have the resources to travel outside of US again.
Thank you, Ken. You certainly did have an interesting and informative college career. I think I told you I was born in Canada and lived there until age 25. I married an American and moved to Florida (which I hated) and finally in 1961 to California, I dropped out of high school at age 16 so I was largely self taught, I read all the great philosophers and some history. I started college when I was 31 at the Community College with declared major in history, and the purpose to become a teacher. It took only 2 semesters to realize I couldn't teach history. My two college professors were not only brilliant, they were stand up comedians. So, I changed majors to Political Science., Then I switched to pre-Law. I had been attending night school only because our two daughters and my husbands 2 sons from a previous marriage were young. When I received my AA, the college listed our majors beside our names. My husband was so angry he would not agree to let me continue college unless I went back to teaching as I had agreed. He was a Civil Engineer and felt that teaching was not a 'profession' but law was and therefor a challenge to him. So I switched again to Biology. In the spring of 1968 I entered University as a biology major with a chemistry minor. which I eventually changed to a second major. I started teaching in the spring of 1973 and finished up my Master Degree in Physiology in 1977 while I was still teaching full time. (I divorced that husband and had a wonderful second marriage)
The history is also self taught. I read constantly. As I said I am particularly interested in medieval history particularly of England, Scotland and Wales. I am more than 90% Scottish (per Ancestry DNA) so I've read a lot about Scottish history from Fergus (800 AD) through the diaspora of 1745. Many different interests.