A key provision within the Magna Carta, known as the ‘security clause,’ mandated the formation of a council comprising 25 barons entrusted with monitoring King John’s compliance with the charter. In the event of the king’s failure, this council possessed the authority to seize his castles and lands, effectively ensuring his adherence to the principles outlined within the document.

While the Magna Carta did not initially achieve its intended objective of securing peace between King John and the barons, its profound impact reverberated throughout history. This groundbreaking charter served as a catalyst for transformative events such as the English Civil War and the American War of Independence. Its enduring legacy remains a testament to the tremendous power held within a mere piece of paper, capable of shaping the trajectory of nations and societies.

King John’s woes

Amidst contemporary efforts to revive King John’s image, historical evidence overwhelmingly supports his reign as an unequivocal disaster. By the year 1215, John had already suffered near-total loss of his father’s continental empire to the French. Subsequently, his desperate and financially burdensome endeavours to reclaim these territories proved futile.

King John on a stag hunt, 14th century. Image credit: Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Image Credit: British Library, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

After a particularly crushing defeat to the French at Bouvines in 1214, John was once again humiliated and forced to pay compensation money to his rival across the channel, Philip II.

Under the feudal system at the time, the money and soldiers required for foreign wars came directly from the barons, who each had their own lands and a private army. Having poured large amounts of money into John’s pockets for his unsuccessful military campaigns, they were unimpressed with the lack of return, and after Bouvines began to show serious signs of resentment.

King John, in stark contrast to his valiant and martial older brother Richard the Lionheart, lacked the same robust and warlike demeanour. Furthermore, John’s personal characteristics did not endear him to the majority of the barons. Their leader, Robert FitzWalter, felt deep animosity towards John, having previously accused him of attempting to assault his daughter. In addition, FitzWalter was implicated in a plot to assassinate the king in 1212.

Historical records attest to the unpopularity of King John among the barons, both due to his perceived personal failings and his alleged misconduct. The strained relationship between John and the barons, epitomised by the antagonism towards him by influential figures like Robert FitzWalter, further complicated the political landscape during his reign.

The dispute’s escalation

Throughout the early months of 1215, John’s attempts to get the pope involved – along with his secret hiring of thousands of French mercenaries – only escalated the dispute. After talks held in London failed, the barons renounced their feudal ties to the king in April and began to march on England’s major cities. This included London, which opened its gates to them without a fight.

With Pope Innocent III refusing to get directly involved, the influential Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton – who was respected by both sides – organised official peace talks. These were to take place at Runnymede, a meadow outside London, in June.

This location was considered a safe middle-ground between Royalist Windsor Castle and the rebel fortress at Staines. There, John, Langton and the senior barons met with their foremost supporters, and began the seemingly impossible task of finding a resolution that would suit everyone.

Following intense deliberations and negotiations, the outcome of their efforts materialised into the historic charter of rights known as the Magna Carta.

What the Magna Carta sought to achieve

Disputes between barons and kings were nothing new – and nor were written solutions – but the Magna Carta went beyond individual baronial complaints and began to address the overall powers and responsibilities of the king at any given time.

The concessions made do not read as particularly radical to modern eyes, but the clauses outlining protection from arbitrary imprisonment (albeit for the barons), and of the church from overt royal interference are concepts now enshrined at the heart of the western idea of freedom.

In addition, the charter placed limitations on feudal payments to the monarch.

Limiting the powers of the king in any way was a hugely controversial move at the time, as evidenced by the pope later decrying the Magna Carta as “shameful and demeaning … illegal and unjust”.

With such humiliating and unprecedented checks put upon the king, civil war was always likely – especially after the barons did indeed create a security council to ensure that John kept his word.

The Magna Carta (originally known as the Charter of Liberties) of 1215. Image credit: Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Image Credit: Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Reissues of the Magna Carta

John later reneged on his granting of the Magna Carta, asking Pope Innocent III for permission to reject it on the grounds that he had been forced to sign it. The pontiff agreed and in August declared the charter invalid. This action sparked the outbreak of the First Barons’ War which would last for two years.

When John died in October 1216, his son Henry became king and the Magna Carta was reissued shortly after – though this time with the security clause and other parts omitted. This helped to bring about peace and set the basis for Henry’s continued rule.

Over the next few decades, the struggle between the barons and the monarchy continued and the Magna Carta was reissued several more times.

Indeed, the final reissue of the charter didn’t come about until 1297, by which point Henry’s son Edward I was on the throne. In 1300, sheriffs were then given the responsibility of enforcing the charter across the kingdom.

The charter’s legacy

Over the coming centuries, the Magna Carta waxed and waned in its significance. After becoming something of a relic, the charter saw a resurgence in the 17th century when it was used as inspiration for the Parliamentarians (who had similar complaints to the barons) in their war against King Charles I.

King Charles I after original by van Dyck. Image credit: Follower of Anthony van Dyck, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Charles ultimately lost that war and was executed. And with him went the last hopes for an absolute monarchy.

A parallel battle against perceived unjust and capricious taxation unfolded in the American colonies of Britain during the following century. The formation of the self-proclaimed United States was heavily influenced by key principles and legal rights established in the Magna Carta.

Henry II (r. 1154-1189)

Henry’s mother Matilda was embroiled in a civil war (known as The Anarchy) with her cousin, King Stephen, for much of the mid 12th century. When Henry inherited the throne in 1154, he proved himself to be a capable ruler, re-established royal authority and English domination of Wales, as well as ensuring his lands in France were under solid control. 

His marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine further cemented his position in France: their marriage proved to be fruitful, producing 8 children in total. Henry is perhaps most famous for the murder of Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral in 1170: the culmination of years of tension as Henry tried to reform the relationship between church and state.  

Unusually, Henry crowned his eldest son Henry during his lifetime in order to ensure the succession. The Young Henry, as he is known, became increasingly frustrated at his father’s inability to give him any real power: in 1173, he, along with Eleanor of Aquitaine and several of his siblings, rebelled against Henry in an event known as The Great Revolt.

Troubled relationships between father and sons continued throughout the rest of Henry’s life as they vied for power and land.  

Engraving of Henry II by J. Smith. (Image credit: CC / New York Public Library).

Richard I (r. 1189-99)

The third son of Henry and Eleanor, it seemed initially unlikely that Richard would inherit: however, his elder brothers all predeceased their father, leaving Richard as heir. A strong and capable military leader, Richard spent most of his reign campaigning on the Third Crusade, winning notable victories against Saladin.  

Richard and Saladin. (Image credit: CC / British Library).

Whilst Richard has become a figure of mythic proportions, known by his epithet – the Lionheart, he was far from a dutiful or good king to his subjects back home, seeing England and his subjects primarily as a source of revenue.   

John (r.1199-1216)

Known as ‘Bad King John’, John’s reign was far from successful. He lost large quantities of English lands in Normandy, leading to the collapse of the Angevin Empire established by his father, Henry II. 

Attempts to regain these lands lasted for most of the rest of his reign, meaning these years were characterised by high taxes as well as military reforms and attempts to build continental alliances.  

On returning to England following another defeat in 1214, John was met by a revolt from his barons. Unhappy at the high taxes and a lack of consideration for their views, they raised an army and marched on London, Lincoln and Exeter.

John met the leaders at Runnymede, where he consented to sign Magna Carta: technically a peace treaty, it was also full of proposals for broader political reform.  

Despite this, neither side really attempted to stick to the bargain: the First Barons’ War consumed most of John’s subsequent reign. He died in 1216, probably from dysentery, having lost a significant part of his baggage in The Wash – one chronicler claims this baggage included the Crown Jewels. 

King John. (Image credit: CC / National Trust).

Henry III (r.1216-1272)

Henry inherited the crown as a minor, so for the early years of his reign he was under the guardianship of William Marshal – a powerful knight appointed by John. The first ten years of his reign was predominantly focused on ending the Barons’ War and restoring royal authority: Henry assumed formal control of his government in 1227.  

Instead of building on the relatively solid foundation laid down for him, Henry’s lax application of his constitutional rights and lack of discipline in court led to the gradual collapse of royal authority. 

His strongly anti-Jewish policies became increasingly disliked, the presence of the powerful Poitevin faction at court caused tensions, and Henry’s increasing obsession with obtaining the kingdom of Sicily all strained relations with his nobles: by 1258, he faced a revolt from his barons. 

Henry agreed to the Provisions of Oxford – an attempt to limit the ability of the king and leading nobles to abuse their power, and forcing Henry to hold triannual parliaments. These were reinforced by the Provisions of Westminster (1259), which Henry’s son and heir Edward helped push through, having allied himself with Simon de Montfort, a leading baron.  

A period of instability followed, in which power was held by several jostling factions eventually culminated in the Second Barons’ War, which saw Henry and Simon de Montfort, each backed by a number of barons, clash on the battlefield. After a decisive victory at the Battle of Evesham, Henry issued the Statute of Marlborough which removed most of the curtailments on his authority, whilst tightening them on nobles.  

Drawing of a stained glass window of Chartres Cathedral, depicting Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester. (Image credit: CC / Gallica Digital Library).

A keen patron of art and architecture, Henry spent large sums of money on royal palaces and castles, including those at Westminster, Windsor, Dover, Lincoln and The Tower of London. He was also extremely devout, regularly going on pilgrimages, attending Mass daily and giving generously to religious causes, particularly those involved in relieving poverty.  

Edward I (r.1272-1307)

Nicknamed Edward Longshanks, at 6’2″, Edward was unusually tall for his time, which many considered gave him a somewhat intimidating presence. Edward initiated war with Scotland which lasted long after his death, as well as a full scale conquest of Wales following a minor rebellion. 

His harsh attitudes towards these two countries has been criticised since his death, as has the fact that in 1290, he issued an Edict of Expulsion against the Jews in England at the time.  

However, Edward did initiate a range of reforms to common law, particularly surrounding feudal liberties, as well as reforming aspects of royal administration.

Parliament became a permanent fixture in Edward’s reign, mainly because it was needed to grant taxes. Expensive wars meant Edward needed a lot of these grants, enabling Parliament to become a fixture in a way it had not been previously.  

Thought to be an image of Edward I. (Image credit: CC / Westminster Abbey).

Edward II (r.1307-1327)

Edward II’s reign was plagued by failure. Crowned in 1307, he married Isabella of France in 1308 in an effort to end tensions between England and France.  

Edward’s reliance on male favourites, most notably Piers Gaveston, proved deeply unpopular at court: nobles demanded his banishment, and Edward’s refusal to do so fully led to a complete breakdown in relations between the king and his barons.  

Combined with heavy defeats in Scotland and famine, Edward quickly lost what little popularity he had. Edward’s new favourites, the Despensers, were as unpopular as Gaveston, and further exacerbated tensions as they attempted to strengthen their grip on power.

Edward’s wife Isabella began to work against him, going rogue on a diplomatic mission to France and returning with a small army in 1326, led by her lover, the exiled Roger Mortimer. Edward was forced to relinquish his crown to his young son Edward, and died shortly afterwards: he is generally believed to have been murdered.

Edward III (r.1327-77)

One of the most popular Plantagenet kings in his lifetime, Edward III reigned for fifty years, overseeing England’s transformation into a formidable military power and the development of Parliament. Crowned aged 14 following his father’s deposition, Edward began to rule personally in 1330, overthrowing and executing Mortimer.  

Edward III, from the 1430 Bruges Garter Book made by William Bruges. (Image credit: CC / Wikimedia).

In 1337, Edward declared himself the rightful heir to the French throne, beginning what is now known as the Hundred Years’ War. Costly and all-consuming initially, Edward and the English Army won significant victories at Crecy and Calais, as well as a major victory in Scotland (who at that time were allies of the French).

The Black Death struck shortly after that, severely reducing manpower as more men were needed for agricultural jobs back in England. The first chapter of the war was closed with the Treaty of Bretigny in 1360, where Edward renounced his claims to the throne.  

Edward’s later reign is generally perceived to be full of failures: international and domestic. Parliament’s influence grew as it was needed to grant taxation so often, and royal authority began to wane. Edward also created the Order of the Garter (which still exists today), reviving chivalry at his court as a way of cementing national identity for his nobles.  

Richard II (r.1377-1399)

Largely known to people through Shakespeare’s interpretation, Richard II’s deposition marked the start of one of the most turbulent periods in English history: the Wars of the Roses. Grandson of Edward III, Richard inherited the throne in 1377, aged 10, with a series of councillors to help guide him.

The Peasants’ Revolt (1381) saw Richard play a relatively major part for a boy of 14 as he met with rebels to initially agree to their demands. Although he granted clemency, he went back on his original agreements, and suppressed the rebellion relatively harshly.  

Miniature from La Prinse et mort du roy Richart (Book of the Capture and Death of King Richard II). (Image credit: CC / Virgil Master).

Many historians consider this to have been a pivotal moment in Richard’s understanding of kingship. He believed in absolute royal authority and his own prerogative: as a result, he attempted to lessen the overall power of the aristocracy whilst maintaining a small group of favourites on whom he became dependent.

Richard’s court was lavish and he was a keen patron of the arts: both of these things needed money to maintain, and high taxes particularly after the war with France was over, made him increasingly unpopular.  

1397-99 is known by many as Richard’s ‘tyranny’: Richard arrested and tried several men who he felt were a threat to his power, acting in a way which made his nobles nervous.

In 1398, he called the Parliament of Shrewsbury, which declared that no restraints could legally be put on the king. This proved too much for his nobles: when Henry Bolingbroke, Richard’s cousin, invaded England in 1399, he received a warm welcome – Richard was deposed and Henry crowned king.

The husband of the formidable Eleanor of Aquitaine and father of John and Richard the Lionheart, Henry’s action-packed reign gave rise to England’s position as a European power to be reckoned with.

Henry was a very young man when he was crowned, having been born just twenty-one years earlier in 1133. He was the son of Empress Matilda, William the Conqueror’s granddaughter, and Count Geoffrey Plantagenet of Anjou, and had a legitimate claim to the throne of England through his mother’s line.

Stephen and Matilda

In fact, when her father Henry I died in 1135 Matilda vociferously voiced her own rights to the throne, only to see her cousin Stephen seize it for himself. Though no woman had ever ruled England, she refused to give up and launched a civil war to claim her birthright.

The reign of the unfortunate Stephen was dogged by the internal fighting known as “The Anarchy” and England was economically ruined by the constant ravages of war.

Much of Matilda’s support came from the south-west, and the young Henry was given his first taste of life in England in 1142 when he was sent to be tutored in Bristol. Meanwhile, his mother fought on, and famously escaped from the besieged castle of Oxford in 1141.

Henry’s first military escapade came at the staggeringly young age of 14, when he lead a band of mercenaries to ravage England’s east coast. It would be the first step of a long and illustrious military career.

Contemporary miniature of Henry’s mother, Empress Matilda, from the ‘Gospels of Henry the Lion’

Image Credit: Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Chroniclers describe Henry as red-haired, and handsome despite being short and famously scruffy. Though a highly intelligent and learned man, he was infamous for his terrible rages and even more threatening silences if things didn’t go his way.

Despite this, his charm and good humour are equally well attested, and even in his teens he had all the attributes to become an exceptional leader of men.

Henry and Louis

Geoffrey, an ambitious father, made Henry the Duke of Normandy in 1150, beginning a lifelong enmity with Louis, the King of France, a man who resented the growing power of Geoffrey’s Plantagenet dynasty. To add insult to injury, after Geoffrey died a year later the eighteen year-old Henry began an audacious marriage.

Louis’ Queen was the beautiful and intelligent Eleanor of Aquitaine, a woman whose dowry included huge swathes of land in what is now southern France. After she failed to give him any children, the French King had the marriage annulled.

Just eight weeks later, however, the teenage Henry had seduced Eleanor and married her, in a move that was both shocking in its rudeness and its aggression, for Henry was now the owner of more French land than the King of France himself. And his ambitions, spurred on by his wife and mother, were only just beginning.

Coming to power and consolidation

1153 would prove to be the decisive year in Henry’s life, as he set sail through winter storms to England.

Though he could only spare a small force of mercenaries, his forces danced around King Stephen’s larger army until worsening weather caused a temporary truce. In that time Henry consolidated his hold on the north and enjoyed playing the part of King while the ageing Stephen fretted.

Luck would favour the younger man when Stephen’s eldest son Eustace suddenly died of an illness, and after the two rivals’ armies faced each other at Wallingford Castle, the exhausted King of England met with Henry and confirmed him as his heir.

Though the peace was precarious and there are theories of an attempted plot to murder Henry and put Stephen’s second son on the throne, the Plantagenet luck stayed with the young invader, for in October 1154 the King died aged 62.

Henry still had a huge amount to do, however. In England at that time much of the power rested with the Barons who had their own castles and private armies. In the lawless years of the anarchy many of them had declared de facto independence and began building new fortresses without royal permission as bases for their armies to harass rivals.

In addition, much of the country’s economy was in ruins and few expected the new and inexperienced King to adequately deal with the situation when Stephen had so conspicuously failed to do so. Henry however set about the kingship with a youthful energy which quickly healed his new kingdom.

King Stephen standing with a falcon, and King Henry II seated on his throne

Image Credit: British Library, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Holding court and smashing the Barons’ illegal castles with glee, Henry quickly became a popular monarch, particularly after forcing the Scottish and Welsh out of their English possessions which they had taken during the chaos of the Anarchy.

Unlike his mother, who had been often-derided for her arrogance, Henry took care to listen to the advice of the English Barons, ensuring that he had enough loyal men doing his bidding to keep the country in check.

He needed them. For Henry did not see himself as an Englishman. Less than a hundred years after the Norman Conquest, to him the English were an alien people to be ruled by their Norman-French overlords.

Though Henry was a fairly benign monarch, he believed that his destiny lay on the continent, the land of his ancestors and the scene of his endless quarrels with France.

One modern French historian has compared the situation in the 1150s with the Cold War, in that Henry and Louis were constantly meeting face to face in order to try and resolve the rowing tensions between them, whilst secretly trying to shift the balance of power in a favourable way.

Henry’s forays into semi-independent Brittany and Tolouse met with success, and in 1161 his rivalry with Louis finally exploded into fighting. After taking the city of Blois in an impressive siege, the King of England was in the ascendancy, and it took the intervention of the Pope to prevent further fighting.

Twenty years into his reign Henry would rule over England, much of Scotland, Wales and Ireland, and almost all of the west of modern France. It is not for nothing that historians have come to christen his lands the “Angevin Empire.”

Empires, however, are notoriously difficult to run, and Henry’s dealt with the problem of ruling his extensive lands in a number of ways. Firstly, like the Romans before him, he took a relaxed approach to central control and generally allowed local feudal lords to do the hard business of ruling for him.

The House Plantagenet

Secondly, the governance of the Empire has been described as a “family affair,” with Matilda and Eleanor wielding huge influence. The later was left in charge of England on numerous occasions while the King was away, and was entrusted with much of the responsibility for her homeland of Aquitaine in the south of France.

Having such an ambitious and talented family was seen as a strength initially, particularly after Eleanor gave birth to a host of sons, but it would eventually prove to be Henry’s undoing.

The early years of the 1170s were eventful for the now middle-aged King. By 1173 he had already invaded Ireland, divided up his Empire between his sons and arranged the infamous murder of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. That year, however, everything fell apart, and family was at the center of it.

Henry’s eldest son of the same name had been chafing for years under his father’s rule, and when some of his castles in France were given to the King’s youngest son John his resentment burst into open rebellion.

Supported by a formidable coalition of France, Scotland, Flanders, his brothers and even his mother – whose relationship with the King had disintegrated – the younger Henry waged war on his own father for over a year.

13th-century depiction of Henry and his legitimate children: (left to right) William, Young Henry, Richard, Matilda, Geoffrey, Eleanor, Joan and John

Image Credit: Anonymus, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Later years and downfall

Few Kings have ever had to face a bleaker situation with his own family against him and invasions on all sides, but Henry held off despair for long enough to defeat all the rebellions and reclaim his lordship over the Empire.

His life, however, could never be the same again. Eleanor was imprisoned, and all the King’s sons but his youngest John could never be fully trusted.

Embittered and resentful, the final years of his reign had him in a strong position but a state of acute misery and mistrust.

By the end of his life his eldest son, Richard, was once again in open rebellion. In hot French weather in 1189 the tired and ailing King met his son and acknowledged him, with some bitterness, as his heir.

Sick and perhaps tired of life, he died shortly after, to be succeeded by the man who would one day be known as the Lionheart, but who had showed little courage in his treatment of his own father.

Henry was not a perfect man. His temper, odd ways and distance as divinely ordained monarch ultimately turned his family against him, but few historians can contend that he was a fine King.

By the end of his reign, his more famous heir was able to leave a stable and prosperous Kingdom and lead the forces of England east to face Saladin and win renown across the world.

John has always had a tough time from historians. The son and younger brother of famous warrior Kings – Henry II and Richard the Lionheart– he is best known for losing England’s Norman possessions to the French, going to war with his own barons and eventually being forced into signing the Magna Carta. The loss of the crown jewels merely added insult to injury. His depiction in the popular Robin Hood stories further cemented his reputation as Bad King John.

A troubled kingdom

By 1216 John had been on the throne for 17 years and faced widespread rebellion, which was supported by the Kings of Scotland and France. Earlier in the year Prince Louis of France landed unopposed in Kent, while the rebels held huge swathes of his Kingdom, including much of the east of England.

As a result in September 1216 John launched a campaign to retake these counties, marching to Cambridge before heading north to relieve a rebel siege of the castle at Lincoln. As John headed back south to King’s Lynn to gather supplies more bad news reached him – Scottish King Alexander II had invaded the north of England and was now heading south to link up with the French. In a desperate hurry John decided to retrace his steps north from King’s Lynn, in order to confront Alexander on his march towards London.

The Wash

John’s march involved crossing the Wash, a tidal estuary which contained quicksands and tidal whirlpools. Precisely what happened is unknown, but John was said to have lost at least part of his baggage train to the Wash, as well as several horses.

British school portrait of King John. Image credit: National Trust / CC.

The Crown Jewels

Our knowledge of the Crown Jewels prior to the 13th century is relatively hazy: there is little documentation or description, so precisely what was lost in somewhat unclear. It is known, however, that when Henry III was crowned in 1220, he used St Edward’s Crown, which was reportedly worn by Edward the Confessor over one hundred years earlier, so this piece of regalia at least was saved from a watery fate.

The modern day crown jewels primarily date back to the Restoration in 1661, with additional jewels and pieces that are older. The Black Prince’s Ruby, for example, was given to Edward (the Black Prince) by a Spanish prince in the 14th century, and has been worn into battle on helmets by various kings.

The so-called ‘Sword of Tristram’ was also lost – a ceremonial sword supposedly kept as regalia according to Angevin records. The last mention of it is in 1207.

John’s disastrous final days

The disaster which then unfolded must have seemed like the final straw to John, with every piece of news further dampening his spirits. A string of notable desertions amongst his followers around this time was prompted by John’s increasing clashing with the barons who had remained loyal to him.

The final nail in the coffin for the King was contracting dysentery in King’s Lynn, and as he headed north he grew steadily more ill, before finally dying at Newark castle on 18 October. He was 49 years old. Rumours of poison swirled on his death, with some saying he’d died from a ‘surfeit of peaches’, but the truth was far more mundane.

No trace of what was lost in the Wash was ever found, but the legend persists nonetheless.

John’s death was perhaps the best thing for his troubled kingdom. He was succeeded by his son, the future Henry III, who was just nine years old. As a result, the real power lay in the hands of the Lord Protector William Marshal, and immensely capable baron who won the civil war in 1217 with victories at Lincoln and Dover, and forced the invading French to renounce their claim to the English throne.

The Angevin Empire

Henry II is widely regarded as the first Plantagenet King of England. Despite this, Henry would himself have instead identified with the House of Anjou. The Angevin Kings of England (Henry and his sons), for the most part did not even reside in the country, but in France instead. However, this is not in reality as confusing as it may first seem.

During the 11th and 12th centuries, there were a series of power struggles amongst noblemen in France. One of these noblemen, Geoffrey of Anjou, diverged to marry Empress Matilda, the last remaining heir of King Henry I of England (following his son, William Adelin’s untimely death in the sinking of the White Ship).

When Henry I died, and Matilda and Geoffrey were away in Anjou, Henry’s cousin Stephen took the opportunity to seize the English throne.  Stephen’s contested accession initiated widespread civil unrest, commonly known as ‘The Anarchy.’ This period was eventually concluded with the Treaty of Wallingford in 1153.

Geoffrey of Anjou is actually where the term Plantagenet derives. His nickname Plantegenest (thought to have originated from the name of the plant, common broom – planta genista in medieval Latin) was later adopted by Richard III, in an attempt to promote his lineage back to the Count of Anjou, and historians coined the term Plantagenet from the 17th century onwards.

The Treaty of Wallingford allowed Stephen to live out the rest of his life as king, however, he was made to name the son of Geoffrey and Matilda, Henry, as his heir. Only a year later, having also recently married Eleanor of Aquitaine, Henry acceeded to the English throne in 1154.

Henry II’s reign was plagued by familial conflict. Despite a tempestuous marriage, Henry and Eleanor would have eight children, two of which would go on to become kings often thought more notable than their father: Richard the Lionheart and King John.

The Angevin Kings would rule what has commonly become known as the ‘Angevin Empire’. This empire would include England, in addition to vast swathes of land in France at its peak. Despite this, there was never a formally recognised and unified Angevin state. Territories would retain their own laws and traditions, so its very existence is contested.

Two separate dynasties?

Some historians have disputed the idea of Henry II being a Plantagenet king in any meaningful sense of the word: instead, they prefer to see the Plantagenet dynasty beginning after the invasion of Louis VIII of France and the death of King John in 1216. The losses suffered by John (including the loss of Anjou) and the instability inherited by his son, Henry III, marked a fundamental shift in European politics and the balance of power.

Portrait of King John by British school, artist unknown. Image credit: National Trust / CC.

Wars of the Roses

Henry of Bolingbrooke (Henry IV) was the first royal representative of the House of Lancaster. Despite the argument that this marks the end of the Plantagenet dynasty, both houses of Lancaster and York were in fact cadet branches of the House Plantagenet.

In comparison to the years before, 15th century England is often characterised by the conflict between the rival houses of Lancaster and York, commonly referred to as The Wars of the Roses.

The House of Lancaster had suffered a bit of a fall from grace following the madness of King Henry VI (Henry of Bolingbrooke’s grandson). The last hope for supporters of the House of Lancaster found itself in Henry Tudor. Despite being the son of a Welsh courtier, his lineage traced back (if not perhaps illegitimately) to Edward III.

The Wars of the Roses culminated in the Battle of Bosworth Field of 1485, in which Henry VII defeated Richard III of York (the last of the Plantagenet dynasty, yet the first to actually adopt the name). When Henry VII went on to marry Elizabeth of York, uniting the two houses, the Wars of the Roses finally came to an end.

The conclusion of this conflict would also see the final conclusion of the Plantagenet dynasty. Following on from them, the Tudors would go on to become one of the most famous royal families (at least in part due to Henry’s son of the same name, Henry VIII) in English history.

Plantagenet legacies

Although Henry VII had a relatively strong claim to the throne, the Plantagenet dynasty had produced at least 16 other members who had an equally strong, if not greater claim to the throne by this point.

Throughout the first half of the 16th century, families such as the Poles, Staffords, Percys and Nevilles, all Plantagenet descendants, remained powerful and influential, and there was a certain amount of mistrust between Henry and his nobles. Marriage proved a particular sticking point as Henry was keen these families should not bolster claims to the throne through marriage.

Frequently romanticised by historians fixated on her beauty, Eleanor demonstrated impressive political acumen and tenacity, influencing the politics, art, medieval literature and the perception of women in her age.

Here are 10 facts about the most remarkable woman in medieval history.

1. The exact circumstances of her birth are unknown

The year and location of Eleanor’s birth are not known precisely. She is believed to have been born around 1122 or 1124 in either Poitiers or Nieul-sur-l’Autise, in today’s south-western France.

Eleanor of Aquitaine as depicted on the window of Poitiers Cathedral (Credit: Danielclauzier / CC).

Eleanor was the daughter of William X, Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poitiers. The duchy of Aquitaine was one of the largest estates in Europe – larger than those held by the French king.

Her father ensured that she was well educated in mathematics and astronomy, fluent in Latin and adept at the sports of kings such as hunting and equestrianism.

2. She was the most eligible woman in Europe

William X died in 1137 while on a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela in Spain, leaving his teenage daughter the title of Duchess of Aquitaine and with it a vast inheritance.

Within hours of the news of her father’s death reaching France, her marriage to Louis VII, son of the king of France, was arranged. The union brought the powerful house of Aquitaine under the royal banner.

Not long after the wedding, the king fell ill and died of dysentery. On Christmas Day that year, Louis VII and Eleanor were crowned King and Queen of France.

3. She accompanied Louis VII to fight in the Second Crusade

When Louis VII answered the pope’s call to fight in the Second Crusade, Eleanor persuaded her husband to allow her to join him as feudal leader of Aquitaine’s regiment.

Between 1147 and 1149, she travelled to Constantinople and then to Jerusalem. Legend has it that she disguised herself as an Amazon to lead troops into battle.

Louis was a weak and ineffectual military leader, and his campaign ultimately failed.

4. Her first marriage was annulled

Relations between the couple were strained; the two were a mismatched pair from the very start.

Effigy of Louis VII on his seal (Credit: René Tassin).

Louis was quiet and submissive. He was never meant to be king, and had led a sheltered life in the clergy until his older brother Philip’s death in 1131. Eleanor, on the other hand, was worldly and outspoken.

Rumours of an incestuous infidelity between Eleanor and her uncle Raymond, the ruler of Antioch, aroused Louis’ jealousy. Tensions only increased as Eleanor gave birth to two daughters but no male heir.

Their marriage was annulled in 1152 on the grounds of consanguinity – the fact that they were technically related as third cousins.

5. She married again to avoid being kidnapped

Eleanor’s wealth and power made her a target for kidnapping, which at the time was seen as a viable option for obtaining a title.

In 1152 she was kidnapped by Geoffrey of Anjou, but she managed to escape. The story goes that she sent an envoy to Geoffrey’s brother Henry, demanding that he marry her instead.

And so just 8 weeks after the dissolution of her first marriage, Eleanor was married to Henry, Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy, in May 1152.

King Henry II of England and his children with Eleanor of Aquitaine (Credit: Public domain).

Two years later, they were crowned King and Queen of England. The couple had 5 sons and three daughters: William, Henry, Richard, Geoffrey, John, Matilda, Eleanor and Joan.

6. She was a powerful queen of England

Once married and crowned queen, Eleanor refused to stay idle at home and instead travelled extensively to give the monarchy a presence across the kingdom.

While her husband was away, she played a key role in directing government and ecclesiastical affairs of the realm and particularly in managing her own domains.

7. She was a great patron of the arts

The obverse of Eleanor’s seal (Credit: Acoma).

Eleanor was a great patron of the two dominant poetic movements of the time – the courtly love tradition and the historical matière de Bretagne, or “legends of Brittany”.

She was instrumental in turning the court of Poitiers into a centre of poetry, inspiring the works of Bernard de Ventadour, Marie de France and other influential Provencal poets.

Her daughter Marie would later become patron to Andreas Cappellanus and Chretien de Troyes, one of the most influential poets of courtly love and the Arthurian Legend.

8. She was placed under house arrest

After years of Henry II’s frequent absences and countless open affairs, the couple separated in 1167 and Eleanor moved to her homeland in Poitiers.

After her sons tried unsuccessfully to revolt against Henry in 1173, Eleanor was captured while attempting to escape to France.

She spent between 15 and 16 years under house arrest in various castles. She was permitted to show her face at special occasions but was otherwise kept invisible and powerless.

Eleanor was only fully freed by her son Richard after Henry’s death in 1189.

9. She played a key role in Richard the Lionheart’s reign

Even before her son’s coronation as King of England, Eleanor travelled all over the kingdom to forge alliances and foster goodwill.

Funeral effigy of Richard I in Rouen Cathedral (Credit: Giogo / CC).

When Richard set out on the Third Crusade, she was left in the charge of the country as regent – even taking charge in negotiations for his release after he was taken prisoner in Germany on his way home.

After Richard’s death in 1199, John became King of England. Although her official role in English affairs ceased, she continued to wield considerable influence.

10. She outlived all her husbands and most of her children

Eleanor spent her last years as a nun at Fontevraud Abbey in France, and died in her eighties on 31 March 1204.

She outlived all but two of her 11 children: King John of England (1166-1216) and Queen Eleanor of Castile (c. 1161-1214).

Effigy of Eleanor of Aquitaine in Fontevraud Abbey (Credit: Adam Bishop / CC).

Her bones were interred in the abbey’s crypt, however they were later exhumed and dispersed when the abbey was desecrated during the French Revolution.

Upon her death, the nuns of Fontevrault wrote:

She was beautiful and just, imposing and modest, humble and elegant

And they described her as a queen

who surpassed almost all the queens of the world.

What the nickname “Bad King John” lacks in originality, it makes up for in accuracy. For that one word best sums up how John’s life and reign panned out: bad.

A troubled start

When we examine the bare bones of John’s biography, this is hardly a surprise. The youngest son of Henry II, he caused plenty of trouble before going anywhere near his father’s crown. He was known in his youth as Jean sans Terre (or “John Lackland”) on account of his want of a landed inheritance.

Henry’s attempt to carve out something for John to govern in central France was the cause of armed warfare between father and sons.

John’s poor behaviour was evident when he was sent to Ireland to enforce English royal prerogatives. Upon his arrival, he provoked the locals by needlessly mocking them and – according to one chronicler – tugging their beards.

It was during his brother Richard the Lionheart’s reign that John’s behaviour became actively perfidious, however. Barred from England during Richard’s absence on the Third Crusade, John nevertheless interfered in the politics of the realm.

When Richard was captured and held for ransom on his way home from the Holy Land, John negotiated with his brother’s captors to keep Richard in prison, giving away lands in Normandy that his father and brother had fought hard to win and keep.

In 1194, Richard was released from prison and John was fortunate that the Lionheart decided to pardon him out of piteous contempt rather than ruin him, as would have been quite justifiable.

The Lionheart’s death

Richard I was the foremost soldier of his generation.

Richard’s sudden death during a minor siege in 1199 put John in contention for the Plantagenet crown. But although he seized power successfully, he never held it securely.

While Henry II and Richard I were the foremost soldiers of their generations, John was a middling commander at best and had the rare ability not only to alienate his allies but also to drive his enemies into one another’s arms.

Within five years of becoming king, John had lost Normandy – the bedrock of his family’s sprawling continental empire – and this disaster defined the rest of his reign.

His hapless and dizzyingly expensive attempts to regain his lost French possessions put an intolerable fiscal and military burden on English subjects, especially those in the north. These subjects had no sense of personal investment in winning back what the king had lost through his own ineptitude and they felt increasing resentment at having to bear the cost.

Meanwhile, John’s desperate need to fill his war-chest also contributed to a long and damaging dispute with Pope Innocent III.

A regrettably present king

King John granted the Magna Carta on 15 June 1215, only to renege on its terms shortly after. This romanticised 19th century painting shows the king ‘signing’ the Charter – which never actually happened.

Not helping matters was the fact that John’s permanent presence in England (after more than a century of more or less absentee kingship since the Norman Conquest) exposed English barons to the full and disagreeable force of his personality.

The king was described by contemporaries as an unchivalrous, cruel and mean-spirited cheapskate. These traits would have been tolerable in a monarch who protected his greatest subjects and their property and provided evenhanded justice to those who sought it. But John, alas, did quite the opposite.

He persecuted those closest to him and starved their wives to death. He murdered his own nephew. He managed to upset those whom he needed in a bewildering variety of ways.

It was no surprise in 1214 when defeat at the calamitous battle of Bouvines was followed by rebellion at home. And it was no surprise in 1215 when John, having granted the Magna Carta, proved himself as faithless as ever and reneged on its terms.

When the king succumbed to dysentery during the civil war he had helped create it was taken as read that he had gone to Hell – where he belonged.

From time to time it becomes fashionable for historians to try and rehabilitate John – on the grounds that he inherited a nightmarish task in keeping together the territories his overachieving father and brother had united; that he has been wrongly defamed on the evidence of uptight monastic chronicles whose authors disapproved of his abuses of the English church; and that he was a decent accountant and administrator.

These arguments almost always ignore the loud and near-universal judgment of contemporaries who thought him an appalling man and, more importantly, a lamentable king. Bad he was, and bad should John remain.

Dan Jones is the author of Magna Carta: The Making and Legacy of the Great Charter, published by Head of Zeus and available to buy from Amazon and all good book shops.

This article is an edited transcript of The Unknown Invasion of England with Marc Morris on Dan Snow’s History Hit, first broadcast 21 May 2016. You can listen to the full episode below or to the full podcast for free on Acast.

By the end of the summer of 1215 Magna Carta, the charter that was created in an attempt to make peace between King John and a group of rebel barons, was as good as dead. It had been quashed by the pope and John had never had any interest in sticking to it.

So the barons came up with a much simpler solution – get rid of John.

By September 1215 they were at war with the king of England.

Being at war with his own subjects, John found himself trying to get foreign mercenaries from the continent, while the barons had found an alternative candidate in Louis, the son of the king of France. Both sides were looking to the continent for support.

Consequently, the south-east of England became the crucial theatre for the conflict.

King John in battle with the Francs (left), and Prince Louis of France on the march (right).

The war started with a spectacular siege of Rochester Castle in Kent, the tallest castle tower and secular building in Europe.

Round One went to John, who broke Rochester Castle – which had previously been captured by baronial forces – in a seven-week siege, famously collapsing the tower.

It was one of the few sieges that saw room-to-room fighting in the keep and must be regarded as one of the most spectacular medieval sieges.

Most sieges tended to end with a negotiated surrender or starvation, but Rochester was the scene of a truly spectacular conclusion. John’s men collapsed a quarter of the tower but because the tower had an internal cross wall, the baronial troops fought on for a short time using it as a second or final line of defence.

The Barnwell chronicler remarked:

“Our age has not known a siege so hard pressed nor so strongly resisted”.

But in the end, when the keep was broached, that was it, the game was up. The baronial forces ultimately surrendered.

It was looking quite glum for the barons by the end of 1215, but in May 1216, when Louis landed on English shores, the advantage moved to the barons.

Rochester Castle, the scene of one of the most spectacular medieval sieges.

Louis invades

Louis landed at Sandwich in Kent, where John was waiting to confront him. But, true to form, John, who had a reputation for fleeing, watched Louis land, thought about fighting him and then ran away.

He fled to Winchester, leaving Louis free to occupy all of south-eastern England.

Louis took Kent and Canterbury before arriving in London, where he was received by cheering crowds because the barons had held London since May 1215.

The French prince was acclaimed as a king, but never crowned.

Was Louis the king of England?

There are examples in history of uncrowned English kings, but in this period coronation was necessary before you could really claim the throne.

There was a window before the Norman conquest when all you needed was acclamation.

People could get together and acclaim the new king, get them to swear an oath and then they could just be crowned whenever they liked.

If you take Edward the Confessor, the penultimate king of Anglo-Saxon England, he was sworn in in June 1042, but not crowned until Easter 1043.

The Normans, however, had a different take on it – you only became king when the holy oil, the chrism, was poured on your head during a coronation service.

Richard the Lionheart is a good example, being the first king for whom we have an accurate coronation description. The chronicler refers to him as the duke up to the moment of his anointing.

What that means, of course, is that there was potential for a period of lawlessness between one monarch’s death and the next monarch’s coronation.

When Henry III died in 1272, his son, Edward I, was out of the country on crusade. It was decided that the country couldn’t wait for months and years without a king. So, before Edward went on crusade, his rule was proclaimed – it would start immediately when Henry died.

Consequently, after 200 years the possibility of an uncrowned king returned to England. But you couldn’t be an uncrowned king in 1216.

This article is an edited transcript of The Unknown Invasion of England with Marc Morris on Dan Snow’s History Hit, first broadcast 21 May 2016. You can listen to the full episode below or to the full podcast for free on Acast.

In September 1216, King John was running out of places to hide. Louis had attacked, immediately putting John on the back foot, and the emboldened English barons were claiming back their castles.

W. L. Warren’s biography has a wonderfully evocative line. He talks about John being like a rabbit caught on a patch of grass that a mower is steadily reducing.

John was essentially down to the West Midlands after the Scots invaded Yorkshire, and was running out of places to hide.

King John, depicted in the illuminated manuscript De Rege Johanne.

John’s final days were miserable. Things had been going badly for many years, but the last week of his life was especially disastrous.

At King’s Lynn, he became badly ill. There are reports that he overindulged, but more sober chroniclers mention dysentery.

Whatever his illness was, it’s safe to say he was exhausted. His itinerary shows that he’d been covering 30 miles a day on horseback for weeks – he was losing a civil war and had to keep moving around just to stay in the game.

King John’s lost treasure

Then, as if things weren’t already bad enough, John lost his treasure while crossing the Wash, a huge tidal estuary with vast mud flats on the east coast of England.

For some reason, bad planning or not having the right guides, perhaps, his baggage train was sucked down into the quicksand.

The scale of the incident isn’t certain.

Roger of Wendover’s account reads like the sinking of the Titanic, with men and horses being sucked into the abyss. But Ralph of Coggeshall’s description is more sober, suggesting that John lost some bits of his chapel.

Interestingly, when Henry III was crowned a few weeks later, it wasn’t with any of the old crowns. Instead it was with a circlet borrowed from his mother. It’s also noteworthy that John’s crowns don’t show up in the early inventories of the treasure in Henry III’s reign. It seems quite likely that John lost at least one crown in the accident.

To see his crown being lost to the depths of the Wash must surely have felt to King John like a final divine judgement of his widely criticised reign. Three or four days later he was dead.

How John’s death saved his dynasty

Perversely, dying was probably the best thing John could have done to protect the Plantagenet’s position in England.

The oldest of John’s two sons, Henry, was only nine when he died.

Had he been 19 and involved in that civil war then he would likely have been tarred with the same brush and disposed of. But being nine was very useful because it meant he was blameless and innocent.

Indeed, the writs that he initially put out talk about him being nothing to do with the arguments of his father’s reign.

The effigy of William Marshal, who became head of Henry III’s regency government, in Temple Church, London.

William Marshal became head of Henry III’s regency government, and his first significant act was to reissue Magna Carta, albeit with the clauses that were most damaging to the crown stripped out.

Even with the omissions, two-thirds of Magna Carta was intact, so a lot of the things that the rebels had been complaining about and lobbying John for were reissued in good faith. A good move on the regency government’s part.

Marshal was also a very experienced warrior and in prosecuting the war now he was prepared to make bold moves of the kind that John always ran away from.

In spring 1217 his Royalists defeated Louis’ French and baronial forces at Lincoln. It was a widely celebrated and decisive victory that went a long way towards re-establishing the Royalists’ power.

A combination of pledging Magna Carta in good faith, having a blameless monarch, and being able to win military victories – all the things that John had failed to deliver – meant that within a year of his death, the civil war that John had created was over.

This article is an edited transcript of Magna Carta with Marc Morris on Dan Snow’s History Hit, first broadcast 24 January 2017. You can listen to the full episode below or to the full podcast for free on Acast.

Some people say Magna Carta is the most important single document in the history of the human race, while others consider it to be little more than a piece of political pragmatism.

So how important is Magna Carta really?

As is so often the case, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle ground.

In the immediate context of 1215, Magna Carta was highly unsuccessful because it was a peace treaty that resulted in war within a few weeks. In its original format, it was unworkable.

Its original format had a clause at the end that allowed England’s barons, who were against King John, to go to war with him if he didn’t stick to the terms of the charter. So, realistically, it was never going to work in the short term.

Crucially, Magna Carta was reissued in 1216, 1217 and 1225 as a somewhat more royalist document.

In the reissues, the important clause that meant the barons could rise up in arms against the king to compel him to adhere to the document was dropped, as were several other clauses which damaged the prerogative of the Crown.

The essential restraints on the money-getting power of the king were preserved, however.

Consequently, Magna Carta had a good, long afterlife in the 13th century when people did appeal to it and did want it reconfirmed.

In 1237 and 1258, as well as in Edward I’s reign, people asked for Magna Carta to be confirmed two or three times. So clearly it was very important in the 13th century.

The iconic power of Magna Carta

Magna Carta was then revived in the 17th century, in the wars between Parliament and the Crown. Thereafter it became iconic, particularly the resonant clauses buried in the middle – 39 and 40.

Those clauses were about justice not being denied, justice not being delayed or sold, and no free man being deprived of his lands or persecuted in any way. They were taken out of their original context somewhat and venerated.

A romanticised 19th-century recreation of King John signing Magna Carta at a meeting with the barons at Runnymede on 15 June 1215. Although this painting shows John using a quill, he actually used the royal seal to confirm it.

It went on to be the foundation of lots of other constitutional documents around the world, including the Declaration of Independence and other constitutions in Australia.

There are only, depending on which version you’re using, three or four clauses of Magna Carta still on the statute book, and they’re there for historic reasons – that the City of London shall have its liberties and that the Church will be free, for instance.

As an emblem, however, Magna Carta continues to be very important, because it says a fundamental thing: that the government will be under the law and that the executive will be under the law.

There had been charters before Magna Carta but none had contained such blanket declarations about the king being under the law and having to abide by the law. In that sense, Magna Carta was innovative and fundamentally important.