Life in General and the Economic Conditions of John's England - Case Study Example

Order 431714 Topic: Assess the view that the civil war of 1215 was more the result of baronial actions than King Johns actions. Life in general and the economic conditions of Johns England: “It is better to have a world united than a world divided; but it is also better to have a world divided than a world destroyed.” said Sir Winston Churchill, at the time of II World War. This quote may not have direct relevance to the civil war of 1215. It, however, serves as a pointer to the mind-set of the British Kings, politicians, barons and the common man. What were the economic conditions of the people in King Johns England? Danny Danzigar writes, “This was a time when a laborer was paid a penny a day, and when an income of ten pounds a year was enough for a country gentleman to maintain a comfortable lifestyle.”(1) Most of the barons were prosperous and the King was envious of their economic status and wished to impose unjust taxes on them to recoup the losses he suffered due to his follies elsewhere. They felt uncomfortable when their economic power and living standards were threatened. Danzigar observes, “But by the standards of the time, when they compared the way they lived with the way in which their parents and grandparents had lived, the rich families of King Johns England felt they were enjoying all mod cons.”(1) The storm of discontent was brewing within the hearts of the barons. It was simmering like the volcano in the bosom of the mountain that will erupt at the most unexpected moment. Though they did not offer an open resistance, they were methodically organizing their forces for the struggle which they believed was imminent. Highhandedness of the King: John governed as per his will with madness in his methods of administration. The exactions were imposed without sparing any sections of the society for financing his crusade and for ransom. Barons consent for such levies was mandatory. The kings authority to levy tributes was being questioned and met with resistance. The king actively interfered in the private life issues of the barons such as choosing the familial heir. He did not hesitate to take the heir as hostage. James Clarke Holt writes, “ Such a hostage could be used in varied circumstances, not only to guarantee uncertain loyalties but to secure the payment of debts or the surrender on demand of a castle. It was the ultimate deterrent in relations between the King and the barons. And those who knew King John also knew that he might use it to the full. By 12115, he had already done so in the case of William de Briouze. It could be a matter of life and death.”(234) The resistance by barons manifested clearly as John tried to consolidate his claim on the throne, and the opposition to kings unfettered authority became much stronger. His reign was riddled with quarrels at several fronts one after another. He was engaged in serious problems from 1199 till 1206 with the King of France. The barons refused to side with him in his continental enterprises. From 1206 to 1213, his quarrel was religious, with Pope and the clergy. From 1213 to the end of his reign, his multiple problems with barons and clergy turned hostile and his actions were challenged. Back to the wall, he was trying to assert his authority, but was too weak to offer resistance resolutely. Enfeebled, he constantly succumbed to their pressure tactics and yielded to their demands. The clergy and the barons remained united for a common cause and in the end, it culminated in his granting them tangible concessions under “Magna Carta” that put the stamp on his defeat and laid foundation for the English constitution. The backgrounder information-the pre-Magna Carta era: What were the developments that preceded the proclamation of Magna Carta? King John did not pronounce it as an act of love, but did so when he was pushed to the wall from all ends. His every endeavor to divide and rule failed; appeasement was of no avail. Threats were meaningless, as the forces that challenged his authority were too strong and united. The Powerful Chair soon became the Chair-less Power! The power of the law and the grace of destiny-both were not on his side. Viewed from any angle, he faced unassailable challenges. To start with, John was not the lawful heir to the crown. It belonged to his nephew, Arthur, Duke of Bretagne, according to the testament of Richard. With clever manipulations, he usurped the throne of England. Sensing danger to his authority from the barons, in 1201 John convened an assembly of Barons at Oxford and impressed on them the necessity of their support in his proposed war against France. The Barons demanded a price for their assistance—restoration by the King their liberties and privileges. Having failed to get their collective consent, he approached each one of them individually, and won the promise of their loyalty. This exercise was, however, the barometer of the resistance by the barons. They would not be taken for granted,John realised. He could well imagine the consequences of the strength of the united front of the barons. Johns desperate actions: John failed to lead the barons by his personal example. An imprudent divorce and vexatious indignities that were part of his disposition,made him an unpopular individual. To consolidate his power-base, he employed into his retinue, bullies, whom he described as champions of royalty. He directed the barons to enter into judicial combats with such individuals to settle their disputes with the crown. Wanting to retain the crown that he took forcibly, he is reported to have murdered Arthur with his own hand. Thus,the time was ripe for his evil deeds to fructify. The signs of general uprising could be seen in the political horizon of the kingdom. The barons totally abandoned him, but John failed to see the writings on the wall. Instead of initiating conciliatory steps he acted imprudently, became more and more ruthless in his dealings, and the process of alienation was total. Yet he defended his actions, and a new escuage of two marks and a half for every knights fief was extracted from the barons. He tried with his divide and rule policy and that of individual appeasement again, but failed miserably. Johns difficulties vs barons and the clergy multiply: The two can not walk together except they are agreed. John wished to walk with those who were not in agreement with him. Apart from the lay aristocracy(barons), he had serious problems with the clergy. This emboldened the barons to take a rigid stand against the king about his contemplated actions. Though the conflict with the clergy was not directly related to the issue of barons in the initial stages, they were compelled to act, when the things became too complicated. As the conflict with the clergy took a serious turn, John drove all the monks from Canterbury and declared himself the receiver of the revenues. Pope acted swiftly, excommunicated the monarch, placing the whole kingdom under his ban and freed his subjects from the oath of fidelity sworn to John. He designated Philip Augustus to execute his decrees, with the offer of crown of England. John had not expected this double danger and requested assistance from his barons. Barons were unrelenting as he had often acted unjustly towards them, and they were not willing to come to his rescue in his misfortunes. The tension in the relations between the barons and John continued to escalate on one issue or the other. After saving himself from the confrontation with the Pope, and securing his crown, his renewed acts of imprudence against his subjects continued and the barons remained constantly hostile to him. His tyrannical approach, his criminal attempts on the wife of Eustace de Vesci, pitted the barons against him. Primate Langton took the leadership of opposition and stimulated the barons. John misreads the strength and determination of the barons: Enamoured by the power of his throne, John failed to recollect that royal power can not withstand the combined might of the clergy and the barons. Their united approach made the throne weak and shaky. He had to succumb to their demands. The boiling point for the clergy was Johns humiliating submission to the Holy Sea. The despotism of Rome, had greatly irritated the English clergy. They were unwilling to take the loss of their privileges without offering the severe protest. Thus the clergy openly came to support the cause of national liberty. The shadows of Civil War: The shadows of Civil War could clearly be seen, except by John. The barons and the clergy were planning for a concerted action. It was no longer whether the king will face a resolute action from the barons, but when! On August 25, 1213, an assembly of the barons was summoned at London. Cardinal Langon read out the charter of Henry I, a copy of which was found by him. The contents of the Charter were well received by the audience. In the meeting on November 20,1214, held at Saint Edmundsbury, each baron took a solemn oath by placing his hand on the altar to use efforts to compel the King to restore the Charter of Henry I. The barons were almost battle ready and were in eager to carry on the final assault against his atrocities. When they presented themselves on January 5, 1215, at London, their demand before John was clear and straightforward. The renewal of the charter and application of the laws of Edward the Confessor. Pushed to the wall, John requested for some time to study the demands and his answer and decision on the demands were postponed till Easter. John tried to re-polish his old weaponry of divide and rule during this intermission. The strategic moves and the counter-moves: By now John had realised his folly of allowing the clergy and the barons to stay united. He must sow the seeds of division in them. To placate the clergy, he granted them the charter of liberty to elect their own bishops and abbots and William de Mauclerc was sent to Rome to complain to the Pope the tough and unlawful stand taken by the barons. Barons sent Eustace de Vesci to Rome with their version of the conflict. The sacredness of their cause was highlighted. Barons, however, did not succeed in winning the grace of Pope. He condemned barons for their act of disloyalty to the crown. But the barons were unrelenting and stuck to their original demands. John made another determined effort to win the total sympathy of the Church, and on 2nd February 1215, made a sacred vow to lead a liberation army in to Palestine. The barons act: When the grace period granted to the King came an end, the barons met again at Stamford in Lincolnshire on the 19th April, 1215; Nearly two thousand knights in arms were also present and the signals to John were clear. When asked to reveal their claims, they gave the same answer and told the King about their determination to establish the charter. John hit back by accusing the barons of demanding nothing short of his crown. He refused to grant them liberties, stating that he was not willing to become their slave. His answer was interpreted as declaration of war by the barons and on the 5th of May, the barons met at Wallingford, reiterated their oath of allegiance, and designated Robert Fitz-Walter as general of the “army of God and of Holy Church.” Thus began the civil war! Pope appealed, addressed letters to the barons and commanded them to desist from their adventure . Robert Barlott writes, “ Negotiations between the rebels and the King went on, conducted by Stephen Langton and others, but were fruitless. Events were dramatically accelerated by the rebel seizure of London....an operation made much easier by the support given to the barons by many of the citizens.”(64) But the hostilities continued unabated and on the 24th May, the victorious barons took possession of London to a great welcome by the citizens, who consented to their entry to the city. John left the city, moved to Odiham in Hampshire county, with just seven knights as escorts. He renewed his efforts for negotiations. He sought intervention of the Pope. Finally he had to accept the law that was forcibly imposed on him by the barons. On the 13th of June, the declared enemies met in a conference in the plain of Runnymead, between Windsor and Staines. They held on to their separate encampments. After some discussions, the King initially adopted the preliminary articles and on 19th June 1215, he put his seal on the famous act known by the name of Greater Charter—Magna Charta.“Thus threatened with civil war, King John reasoned correctly that negotiating was the idea of the day.”(Magna Carta....) The implementation of Magna Carta: Broadly speaking, the charter was divided into three parts. The interests of the clergy, regulating the nobility and the third relating to the people. Clause 61 was the most significant one, that tightened the screws on the power and freedom of action of the King. A committee of 25 barons will oversee and act as the watchdog committee to check the actions of the King. The barons would meet at anytime to overrule the will of the King, if necessary use force to seize his castles and possessions. There was nothing new in this procedure, it was the medieval legal practice known as distraint, but it was applied to monarch for the first time. The King must take the oath of loyalty to the Committee. The King became powerless. Pope Innocent III annulled this agreement which he termed as shameful and demeaning and forced on the King by fear and the threat of violence. The restraints on the King were rejected as they hurt the dignity of the King. The action of the Barons was also considered as an affront to the authority of the Church over the King. The King stood released by the Church from his oath to obey it. King Johns post-Magna Carta strategy: By agreeing to put his seal on the Charter, John was working for a strategy and the right opportunity to strike back.“Magna Carta should not be seen as a sign of surrender. In Johns mind, it was only a clever stalling action, intended to demonstrate his reasonableness to the undecided baronial majority in the run-up to inevitable hostilities. It was a bargaining chip: nothing more.”(BBC-History....) He complained and threatened about all the restrictions put on his powers and the angry King retired to the Isle of Wight. There he succeeded in getting the enrollment of an army of Brabanters to regain his power by force and also sent a messenger to Rome seeking aid. J. C. Holt writes, “In 1215 Magna Carta was a failure. It was intended as a peace and it provoked war. It pretended to state customary law and it promoted disagreement and contention. It was legally valid for no more than three months, and even within that period, its terms were never properly executed.”(1) Innocent III did not like the rigid stand of the barons. He resented their attitude whom he called his vassals. He annulled the Great Charter, and excommunicated all the rebellious barons. Evaluation of King John with a new perspective: In his excellent book, W. L. Warren attempts to rehabilitate the image of King John. Warren sees a gulf existing between the reality of Johns reign and its popular perception. He writes, "It is a gulf that I have attempted in this book to bridge--reassessing the reign of King John in the light of the most recent research, and presenting it in a way that is, I hope, both readable and sound" (xi). As a person he was a complex personality and challenged the barons move by move. He was willing for co-operation or conflict with the church as per the demand of the situation, but self-interest was supreme to him. He was molded like that. Warren further writes about the personality of John, “ John defined every man, seeming to challenge his whole world single-handed. For six years he brushed aside the denunciation of the great Pope Innocent III gathering the church in England into his fierce hands and squeezing out of it all opposition and nearly all life. He feared not God, nor respected men.”(2) Barons vs. the King. The barons were not angles, and the King was not outright devil. Each party reacted when it saw threat to its interests and power. Barons were not a united force at all times, and were acting like the different trade union groups. The King used the techniques of the management to divide and defeat them. When the King saw the powerful support forthcoming for him, he threw away the mask of peace, Magna Carta was sidetracked. With the support of the foreign mercenaries, he made the last ditch attack on barons on October 1215. His army advanced rapidly and soon he was in control and reached as far as Rochester Castle. The entire Kingdom shook with his acts of vengeance. “A civil war caused by the failure of King John to honour the terms of the Magna Carta. The Barons offered the throne to Louis, son of Philip II Augustus of France.”(Rickard J...) Inviting the French King was by no means an act of patriotism by the barons. They were willing to go to any extent for securing their self-interest and prolong the Civil War. Soon, the Barons were divided and weak, sought a foreign ally, in Prince Louis, to rescue them. Utter confusion prevailed in both the camps, John was abandoned by his friends and the soldiers. The barons camp was in disarray and some expressed their allegiance to the King. Each group of barons was working for its self-interest and the loyalties often fluctuated. The demised of King John: On 17th of October, 1216 King John died unexpectedly. How long the Civil War continued after the death of King John is not a pertinent issue; what is important is barons are equally responsible to escalate the Civil War and they always mused about their self-interest, when the peace process was an attainable reality. Robert Barlett writes, “ On occasion, aristocratic rebels clearly had a programme, couched in the language of principled reform. The barons who opposed John in the period that led to, and followed, Magna Carta possessed an ideological scheme.”(52) But in the final analysis, not barons alone, but the King also earned the displeasure of all sections of the society. S. D. Church writes, “ If there is one criticism that can be leveled at historians of Johns reign, it is that sometimes we are guilty of excusing the fact that the reign ended in the disaster of Civil War. No group of subjects, no matter how numerous and powerful, lightly takes on the task of unseating a medieval King. The fact that his subjects undertook forcibly to remove him from office must, in the end be the lasting judgment on King John.”(Introduction,p. xxvi) The barons had a clear objective of power sharing and wished to secure their economic interests, no matter how long the Civil War continued. ***************** Works Cited: Barlett, Robert. England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075-1225 (New Oxford History of England) Oxford University Press, USA .October 3, 2002. BBC - History - British History in depth: King John and the Magna ... Retrieved on April 13, 2010 Church, S. D. King John-New Interpretation; The Boydell Press, Woodbridge,UK 1999. Danziger,Danny(Author), Gillingham, John(Author).1215: The Year of Magna Carta Touchstone, 2004. Holt, J. C. Colonial England, 1066-1215; Google Books, 1997. Holt, J. C. Magna Carta;Publisher: Cambridge University Press; 2 edition, May 29, 1992 Magna Carta - 1215 Retrieved on April 13, 2010. Rickard, J. (25 August 2000), First Barons War, (1215-1217), Retrieved on April 13,2010 Warren, W. L. King John (English Monarchs); University of California Press, October 9, 1978. Read More