If the author's rejection of modern interpretations of the significance of Magna Carta is right, then we need to ask why students should learn about it at all. The only reason to force young people to study history is for its contribution to their understanding the present and future. This author fails to show what that means in the case of the Magna Carta.

This from Our Corrupt Legal System. I make the usual mistake of saying King John signed.

4. Magna Carta: a tax evasion scheme

Magna Carta is invoked to support all manner of legal claims, but it was essentially an attempt by the magnates to evade tax and dilute the power of the king. Arthur Marriott QC, of London, said in Breaking the Deadlock a lecture on international arbitration in Sydney in October 2005: ‘Magna Carta was of course a charter for the feudal aristocracy.’
Scutage was a tax in lieu of military service. When King (1199-1216) John insisted that magnates pay scutage when they refused service in France, the great men gathered outside London in June 1215, and demanded at sword-point that the king sign a charter. Some sections with comments:
Section 21: ‘Earls and barons shall not be amerced [fined] except through their peers.’ Peers were unlikely to order other peers to pay scutage.
Section 39: ‘No freeman shall be … imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land’. Freemen owned freehold land and were one level below the magnates. They were unlikely to imprison their peers.
Section 40: ‘To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice’. That tends to confirm that a bribe would buy justice, and a job as a judge.
To gain time, John signed the charter and then, as a vassal of Innocent, appealed to Rome. The Pope annulled the charter in August 1215 on the ground that John had signed under duress and without the Pontiff’s consent. The charter was thus in force for nine weeks

Thank you David for one of the most thoughtful and significant contributions I have read on OLO. You have used the Magna Carta to illustrate your points, but the same forensic analysis could be applied to a host of other areas, not just history, but also particularly in science. There is something profoundly wrong with the education system that it produces so many people ignorant of basic scientific knowledge. Evolution is but one illustration, and the recent extended comment section in OLO on climate change is another.

Your critique of the teaching of a seminal moment in our history (1215) could also be applied to more recent events. A discussion of how great events of the 20th century are continually misrepresented in books, newspapers, tv and radio would constitute a major article in its own right. As to why this might be, a useful insight is gained from Herman and Chomsky's 1988 study "Manufacturing Consent". The role of the modern media is essentially as a propaganda tool for the governing elites. To a degree schools perform a similar function.

To present an accurate analysis of history poses a challenge to the status quo. The brief history of the present government shows how little tolerance there is for forensic analysis, or even the dissemination of information that runs counter to its preferred version of events. The supine response of our major media reinforces the dangerous trends in play.

I hope that your article is widely read and some lessons learned from it.

David,

while accuracy is of course desirable, too much detail will lose a Year 8 classroom very quickly. History in the middle years is necessarily an overview and, if the kids are interested in a specific topic, a guide for their own reading or further research.

There is a lot of competition for attention in the classroom, and attention is a limited commodity, relative to what adults might expect.

“The Charter was not, ... a charter of human rights or a .... It was an agreement between the King and his nobles about how certain medieval grievances would be handled.”

C’mon David, as imperfect as it was, it was still technically a charter of human rights for free men as well as Barons.

ARTICLE 1: …the Church shall be free, its rights undiminished,

ARTICLE 7: A widow, on the death of her husband, shall immediately have her marriage portion and inheritance.

8: No widow shall be compelled to marry so long as she wishes to live without a husband,

9: Our bailiffs shall [not] seize any land for payment of debt so long as the debtor's chattels are sufficient to discharge the same …

20: For a trivial offence, a free man shall be fined only in proportion to the degree of his offence...

21: Earls and barons shall be fined only by their equals, ...

27: If any free man shall die intestate, his chattels are to be distributed by his nearest kinfolk and friends,

28: No constable or bailiffs shall take corn or other provisions from any man without immediate payment...

30: No sheriff or other of Our bailiffs, shall take the horses or carts of any free man for transport without consent.

31: Neither We nor Our bailiffs will take another man's wood for Our castles without the owner's consent.

38: In the future no bailiff shall upon his own unsupported accusation place any man upon trial

39: No free man shall be imprisoned, outlawed, or banished, except by lawful judgment of his equals

40: To no one will We sell to no one We deny or delay, right or justice.

41: All merchants shall have safe conduct to go and come out of and into England,

42: In the future it shall be lawful for anyone to leave and return to Our kingdom safely and securely by land and water,


54: No one shall be arrested or imprisoned upon a woman's appeal for the death of any other person than her husband.

ITS UNUSUAL..TO SEE THE comments adding SO MUCH
to what is a good article..wow 799 years old

AS I RECALL..THE RIGHT..TO OWN ARMS..RELATES TO LAWS PATENT
ie the right to hold A COAT OF arms [status/OFFICE.PERMISSIONS LICENSE/WARRENTO[right]..warrant/seal/sign/entente]..IE THE PATENT LAWS REST on the laws of heraldry shivery honor.

anyhow in practice THE COURTS IGNORE IT.
BUT ITSV CERTSAINLY WORTH READING and mention

noting in qld..[where the loWER HOUSE simply voted itself from the constitution]..sans the required REFERENDUM..[I THIN AS AN INCLUSION OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT [70?].OF 2002..[WHERE a lawyer decided to rewrite the CON..INTO AN ACT]..THE AGNA CATA IS THROWN IN[IN LATIN]..FOR DECORATION.

I HOLD THE HERALDIC HONOUR for the head of the deer
as well as the golden horn..both exist on the state shield
yet as freeborm freeman..the court has aziezed my house..for 3000 dollars unpaid court debt[statute]..sans judgment of peers..as well as suspended license rego..and banka ccounts

FOR WHAT..might is riGHT..
THERE ARE TWO LAWFUL Reasons to seek court remedy
personal injury[criminal]..or civil..[contract]..que warrento?

its all just smoke and mirrors

i got higher perMISSIONS..OF GOD..
but need reminding ..this is satans realm..[look behind the curtain]