Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical IntroductionMcKechnie, William Sharp
History
Magna Carta: A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John: With an Historical Introduction
McKechnie, William Sharp
Constitutional history -- England -- Sources; Law -- England -- History; Law -- England -- Sources; Magna Carta
It is unnecessary to treat in detail of the copies of the charter not
authenticated by John’s Great Seal, though some of these are of great
value as secondary authorities. The four most important are (_a_) a
copy appearing in the Register of Gloucester Abbey, (_b_) the Harleian
MSS., British Museum No. 746 (which also contains the names of the
twenty-five Executors in a hand probably of the reign of Edward I.),
(_c_) in the Red Book of the Exchequer. There is also (_d_) an early
French version, printed in D’Achery, _Spicilegium_, Vol. XII. p. 573,
together with the writ of 27th September addressed to the Sheriff of
Hampshire. See Blackstone, _Great Charter_, p. xviii., and Thomson,
_Magna Charta_, pp. 428-430.
-----
II. _Comparison of the Originals._ Prior to the publication of Sir
William Blackstone’s great work, extraordinary confusion seems to have
prevailed concerning the various Charters of Liberties. Not only was
John’s Magna Carta confused with the various re-issues by Henry; but
these latter were known only from an official copy of the Charter of
1225 contained in the confirming statute of the twenty-eighth year of
the reign of Edward I., known as an “Inspeximus,” because of the opening
word of the King’s declaration that he had seen the document of which he
gave a copy. Neither Madox[296] nor Brady[297] was aware of the
existence of any one of the four originals; and no mention is made of
them in the first edition of Rymer’s _Foedera_, which appeared in 1704.
Mr. Tyrrell indeed seems to have known of the second original copy in
the British Museum and also of the Salisbury version.[298] Mr. Care[299]
showed no clear knowledge of the various manuscripts, though he
mentioned the existence of several. Even Sir William Blackstone in 1759
collated only the two Cottonian copies, since he failed to find that of
Salisbury, and was unaware of the existence of the Lincoln
manuscript.[300]
-----
Footnote 296:
Thomas Madox, _Firma Burgi_ (1726). On p. 45, Madox refers only to the
_Inspeximus_ of Edward I.
Footnote 297:
Robert Brady, _Complete History of England_, p. 126 of Appendix to
Vol. I. (1685), takes his text of the Charter from Matthew Paris,
“compared with the manuscript found in Bennet College Library.”
Footnote 298:
James Tyrrell, _History of England_ (1697-1704). In p. 9 of Appendix
to Vol. II. p. 821, Tyrrell prints a text of John’s Charter founded on
that of M. Paris, collated with those two originals.
Footnote 299:
Henry Care, _English Liberties in the Freeborn subjects’ inheritance;
containing Magna Charta_, etc. (1719), p. 5. The first edition, with a
somewhat different title, is dated 1691.
Footnote 300:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account