What do you think?
Rate this book
Magna Carta: The True Story Behind the Charter
2015 is the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta, which took place in 1215. In this new book published in celebration of that event, eminent historian David Starkey explores the many aspects of Magna Carta and its relevance today.
Starkey
The historical background of Magna Carta
How it created the modern British constitution
Its importance for Britain today
The international impact of Magna Carta
An exciting new project from David Starkey, this book invites readers to see this historical text in a fresh new context.
Starkey
The historical background of Magna Carta
How it created the modern British constitution
Its importance for Britain today
The international impact of Magna Carta
An exciting new project from David Starkey, this book invites readers to see this historical text in a fresh new context.
320 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 9, 2015
120 people are currently reading
1316 people want to read
About the author
David Starkey
133 books462 followersDavid Robert Starkey, CBE, FSA is a British historian, a television and radio presenter, and a specialist in the Tudor period.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
January 12, 2019
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
This was a fairly basic survey of what the Magna Carta was, how it came about, and what it means to us now. I won’t say it didn’t tell me anything I didn’t know, because it does go into a bit of the back-and-forth and negotiations about what the Magna Carta actually contained and why, but it felt very slight. The subtitle of this book is “The Medieval Roots of Modern Politics”, and I didn’t think it really dug into that very much at all, in fact.
So not a bad book, but not exactly a deep dive either. Readable, but. Shrug.
This was a fairly basic survey of what the Magna Carta was, how it came about, and what it means to us now. I won’t say it didn’t tell me anything I didn’t know, because it does go into a bit of the back-and-forth and negotiations about what the Magna Carta actually contained and why, but it felt very slight. The subtitle of this book is “The Medieval Roots of Modern Politics”, and I didn’t think it really dug into that very much at all, in fact.
So not a bad book, but not exactly a deep dive either. Readable, but. Shrug.
June 3, 2019
I often find history books that tackle periods before about 1500 to be disorientating with unfamiliar names of people, places, festivals and profoundly different ways of life. This account of Magna Carta thankfully suffers none of those issues, being readable and relatable. It explains how the Charter came to be and the war that was fought over it. Whilst acknowledging the uncertainty of events it presents the story in a quirky and compelling narrative and links that in a short conclusion the future that Magna Carta would influence.
November 20, 2019
I guess this book does what it says on the tin! It tries to undo the created story around the Magna Carta and actually what really happened. I sometimes find the verbosity in Starkey's writing rather too much. I love language; I love the use of different and unusual words but it feels as if it's almost done in order to prove a point, to point out how intelligent and widely read he is whilst making the book slightly less accessible and more difficult to read. Having said that, I do enjoy his books and also feel I've learn lots by the time I've read it but the overload of words can make the reading hard work. Maybe that's more a reflection on myself than the author.
December 13, 2018
This is a book about the Magna Carta document, and not much else. Which makes it quite a short book.
Sure, there's context provided on how it came about - namely, a quick tour of the reign of King John. But it's an exceedingly brief history, and it's somewhat frustrating that Starkey tends to quote from just two primary historical sources, one of which he dismisses as unreliable and the second the reader should dismiss as unreliable.
Still, as a short tour of mediaeval history it is interesting, but it stands out as much for its limited perspective as much as anything else, and doesn't really seem to work well as either a populist book or an academic text.
The one saving grace is that it does include different versions of the Magna Carta for comparison in the Appendix.
Sure, there's context provided on how it came about - namely, a quick tour of the reign of King John. But it's an exceedingly brief history, and it's somewhat frustrating that Starkey tends to quote from just two primary historical sources, one of which he dismisses as unreliable and the second the reader should dismiss as unreliable.
Still, as a short tour of mediaeval history it is interesting, but it stands out as much for its limited perspective as much as anything else, and doesn't really seem to work well as either a populist book or an academic text.
The one saving grace is that it does include different versions of the Magna Carta for comparison in the Appendix.
February 29, 2016
A succinct description of the infancy of Magna Carta, as it developed in the immediate aftermath of Runnymede.
April 29, 2024
The Magna Carta is one of those foundational documents in the story of democracy, especially when told from an Anglo-American perspective. This short volume serves as a good introduction to the document, especially the fact that it was re-issued and significantly edited in the years that followed its original signing in 1215. Starkey attempts to place the document in its historical context, but that context was so nuanced and complex, that I felt like he skipped over a lot. A decent read, but I think this topic deserves more exploration than this book allowed.
January 19, 2020
I first gazed upon an "original copy" of the Magna Carta about 10 years ago in Salisbury Cathedral. Housed in a special room and enclosed in a large glass case its size and look bears no resemblance to the power and influence this document has had on world history over 800 years. I also visited the British Museum in 2015 for a special Magna Carta exhibition celebrating the 800th year of its creation. As far as I know there are 4 surviving copies in England at Salisbury, Lincoln, Durham and the British Museum.
In very recent times, the validity of the United Kingdom relying on this ancient document as a substitute for a modern written constitution has been questioned, especially in relation to recent behaviours of many politicians regarding the Brexit Referendum, and some judgements of our Supreme Court. It has set me thinking where I personally stand on this, and whether the nature of our society is such that we are at risk of further political and legal machinations where "the rule of precedent" can be manipulated at will. It is this that enticed me to read David Starkey’s Magna Carta, The True Story Behind The Charter.
The book ends its final chapter with these words about the Constitution of the United States of America showing the influence of this scrap of parchment.
"The text of Magna Carta is incorporated in extenso into the constitutions of seventeen of the fifty US States; a copy of the Charter is displayed alongside the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in the Great Hall of the Archives in Washington and another in the basement of the Rotunda of the Capital; while the granting of the Charter is represented in relief on the bronze doors of the Supreme Court, whose Justices have cited the Charter itself over four hundred times in their judgments. In short, the Charter lives in America. Or at least it has acquired a new lease of life."
However, David Starkey in his book shows that across a 10 year period from 1215 to 1225, there was more than one version of Magna Carta that was begun by King John at Runnymede, and finalised by his son King Henry III. As far as I can work out this was the third version, the first in 1215 being revolutionary and coercive, the second in 1216 being more "centrist" to use the word of the author, and the version of 1225 adding new clauses and removing old ones that showed a high degree of coercion.
"In less than half a century and within the lifetime of a single king, Magna Carta had metamorphosed from a revolutionary and incendiary tract into a solemn text, sanctified and honoured and paraded in the theatre of royal and ecclesiastical ceremony. It was not an outcome that anyone in 1215 could have foreseen."
The book describes well the various stages of the development of the Magna Carta and the main characters involved, principally the two kings, John then Henry, but also
Stephen Langton and William Marshall the chief advisors to each king respectively. One a scheming cleric, the other a highly principled and chivalrous knight.
What I was not aware of was that during the final years of King Johns life he had to fight a civil war in England. The 25 Barons who held a great deal of power after Runnymede in 1215 decided to depose King John and offered the crown to Prince Louis, the eldest son of Philip Augustus of France. Eventually Louis raised an army and invaded England. It was during this protracted war that King John died, not in battle but of dysentery in the east of England in October 2016. It was John’s Young son Henry who eventually defeated Louis via the strategy of William Marshall and which led to securing the crown and the strengthening of a new version of Magna Carta. The power of the Barons was lost for good.
This was a very easy book to read and I finished it in a couple of evenings. David Starkey is an eminent historian specialising in Tudor history and constitutional issues. He has been very vocal during the Brexit farce in parliament, not that you would know it
because the mainstream media don’t want him heard. Which brings me back to my early question as to whether the United Kingdom should have a written constitution. Having pondered it for three years and listened to David Starkey on YouTube and in podcasts, he and I agree ...... yes, we should now have a written constitution!
In very recent times, the validity of the United Kingdom relying on this ancient document as a substitute for a modern written constitution has been questioned, especially in relation to recent behaviours of many politicians regarding the Brexit Referendum, and some judgements of our Supreme Court. It has set me thinking where I personally stand on this, and whether the nature of our society is such that we are at risk of further political and legal machinations where "the rule of precedent" can be manipulated at will. It is this that enticed me to read David Starkey’s Magna Carta, The True Story Behind The Charter.
The book ends its final chapter with these words about the Constitution of the United States of America showing the influence of this scrap of parchment.
"The text of Magna Carta is incorporated in extenso into the constitutions of seventeen of the fifty US States; a copy of the Charter is displayed alongside the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in the Great Hall of the Archives in Washington and another in the basement of the Rotunda of the Capital; while the granting of the Charter is represented in relief on the bronze doors of the Supreme Court, whose Justices have cited the Charter itself over four hundred times in their judgments. In short, the Charter lives in America. Or at least it has acquired a new lease of life."
However, David Starkey in his book shows that across a 10 year period from 1215 to 1225, there was more than one version of Magna Carta that was begun by King John at Runnymede, and finalised by his son King Henry III. As far as I can work out this was the third version, the first in 1215 being revolutionary and coercive, the second in 1216 being more "centrist" to use the word of the author, and the version of 1225 adding new clauses and removing old ones that showed a high degree of coercion.
"In less than half a century and within the lifetime of a single king, Magna Carta had metamorphosed from a revolutionary and incendiary tract into a solemn text, sanctified and honoured and paraded in the theatre of royal and ecclesiastical ceremony. It was not an outcome that anyone in 1215 could have foreseen."
The book describes well the various stages of the development of the Magna Carta and the main characters involved, principally the two kings, John then Henry, but also
Stephen Langton and William Marshall the chief advisors to each king respectively. One a scheming cleric, the other a highly principled and chivalrous knight.
What I was not aware of was that during the final years of King Johns life he had to fight a civil war in England. The 25 Barons who held a great deal of power after Runnymede in 1215 decided to depose King John and offered the crown to Prince Louis, the eldest son of Philip Augustus of France. Eventually Louis raised an army and invaded England. It was during this protracted war that King John died, not in battle but of dysentery in the east of England in October 2016. It was John’s Young son Henry who eventually defeated Louis via the strategy of William Marshall and which led to securing the crown and the strengthening of a new version of Magna Carta. The power of the Barons was lost for good.
This was a very easy book to read and I finished it in a couple of evenings. David Starkey is an eminent historian specialising in Tudor history and constitutional issues. He has been very vocal during the Brexit farce in parliament, not that you would know it
because the mainstream media don’t want him heard. Which brings me back to my early question as to whether the United Kingdom should have a written constitution. Having pondered it for three years and listened to David Starkey on YouTube and in podcasts, he and I agree ...... yes, we should now have a written constitution!
November 24, 2018
Accessible and interesting.
David Starkey's words in early 2016 seem all the more relevant now, at the end of 2018:
"But it is easy to become complacent, as we are doing conspicuously in this 800th anniversary year. We live in easy times and have forgotten what happens when things go wrong. We are bored and we crave excitement. We are ignorant of history and have a child-like belief in the future. Politics and politicians are held in contempt and the necessary mixture of motives and give and take of the political process is despised. The state is expensive, burdensome and intrusive. The law is straining to adapt to new attitudes and technologies. The periphery of Britain is in revolt; malcontents abound in the elite; our relations with the Continent are fraught; religious radicalism is on the rise. Is it silly to think there is a touch of 1215? A whiff of revolution in the air? If so, we can only hope that, in the fullness of time, we find a new William Marshal."
David Starkey's words in early 2016 seem all the more relevant now, at the end of 2018:
"But it is easy to become complacent, as we are doing conspicuously in this 800th anniversary year. We live in easy times and have forgotten what happens when things go wrong. We are bored and we crave excitement. We are ignorant of history and have a child-like belief in the future. Politics and politicians are held in contempt and the necessary mixture of motives and give and take of the political process is despised. The state is expensive, burdensome and intrusive. The law is straining to adapt to new attitudes and technologies. The periphery of Britain is in revolt; malcontents abound in the elite; our relations with the Continent are fraught; religious radicalism is on the rise. Is it silly to think there is a touch of 1215? A whiff of revolution in the air? If so, we can only hope that, in the fullness of time, we find a new William Marshal."
February 24, 2016
A very good read from start to finish. In this book Starkey proves the extent of his knowledge by delving into a rather more unique period in English History. Renowned as one of the foremost experts of the Tudor Period, Starkey shows us that in fact his talents can extend far and beyond Henry VIII, by looking at the initiation of Royal and Baronial Politics in Medieval England. Starkey takes us on a journey with King John from 1214/15 and highlights the key points in the integration of the Magna Carta in England, even extending out of England by pointing out the big European players that either helped to support or denounced the charter. A most enthralling read from start-to-finish, including at the end with full written-out copies of each of the different versions of the Charter. I would highly recommend this book to any English History enthusiast.
October 6, 2019
Disappointing.
Starkey makes the valid point that there are multiple versions of the Magna Carta. He gives a lot of fine detail in the events leading up to the creation of the first version , but then almost seems to lose interest in his subject. Reduced background detail on the 2nd version.
The third version of the Charter issued in 1216 is dealt with very briefly.
William Marshal, regent to Henry III, decided that a further revised version should be issued - so thats all right then. No description of he challenges to get this revision accepted - just done.
The book is very short and comes to an abrupt end - more analysis of the long term impact, influence or durability of the Charter would have been informative.
The book also suffers from the perennial Kindle problem that pictures diagrams; notes just cannot be read on the screen - Amazon should really publish a health warning with books of this nature that some ( key ) parts of the text are likely to be illegible
Overall, this seems a lazy effort from one of our more distinguished historians
Starkey makes the valid point that there are multiple versions of the Magna Carta. He gives a lot of fine detail in the events leading up to the creation of the first version , but then almost seems to lose interest in his subject. Reduced background detail on the 2nd version.
The third version of the Charter issued in 1216 is dealt with very briefly.
William Marshal, regent to Henry III, decided that a further revised version should be issued - so thats all right then. No description of he challenges to get this revision accepted - just done.
The book is very short and comes to an abrupt end - more analysis of the long term impact, influence or durability of the Charter would have been informative.
The book also suffers from the perennial Kindle problem that pictures diagrams; notes just cannot be read on the screen - Amazon should really publish a health warning with books of this nature that some ( key ) parts of the text are likely to be illegible
Overall, this seems a lazy effort from one of our more distinguished historians
March 18, 2025
The good thing with Starkey is his works never read as boring histories, but always as riveting dramas. Not because he tends to dramatize, I would say. I'm mostly familiar with Starkey's work in Tudor history, so I don't have much pre-knowledge of his subject here, so I can see that Starkey's approach is to simply (as cliché as it sounds) "bring history to life." Not by dramatizing or romanticizing, but by having a clear narration of facts and events, a base requirement for any work of history. That said, the book is more about being a solid narrative of how the Magna Carta came about than a retrospective reflection of how it's relevant today: reflections on its present-day importance is more of a read-between-the-lines affair, such as how similar/different medieval politics is to our politics of today.
March 8, 2020
Classic David Starkey. A short commentary on the events surrounding the feature presentation at Runnymede (most likely). Not much new information for those already acquainted with John's reign but Starkey's writing has always had a great ebb and flow. He's a great author to follow if you like your histories without the cliches or snarky jokes that some historians attempt to sprinkle their works with. That being said, I had to laugh at the jab at Gillingham, another one of my favourite medievalists.
Definitely enjoyed this one.
Definitely enjoyed this one.
December 9, 2024
A very informative and thought provoking read about the Magna Cartas (1215, 1216 and 1225). Based on the dates of the establishment of the Cartas there remains a lot of doubt and speculation about actual events, but Starkey attempts to explain happenings through a political lens of the time. Very good background and description of historical events and characters involved, without going into too much detail (or wild speculation).
May 16, 2019
I’m a big David Starkey fan. I have a signed copy of this book so it’s particularly special to me. Witty, intelligent and to the rafters with knowledge. It’s a good read. The forthright character of Starkey makes regular and enjoyable appearances. I enjoyed this, easy reading and very well researched. Worth reading and venturing back for referencing OMG you’re finished. Enjoy!
December 12, 2019
I thought I was getting an in-depth tome of a book (when you read on a Kindle you have no idea of the weight of a book).
However it was a quick entertaining read and I learnt a fair bit, but would have preferred a good look at the protagonists, deeper background and overall more detail. How did John amass a fortunate then lose it?
However it was a quick entertaining read and I learnt a fair bit, but would have preferred a good look at the protagonists, deeper background and overall more detail. How did John amass a fortunate then lose it?
June 22, 2025
An okay book, I found it to be quite a simplistic view of the Magna Carta. it did not really delve onto much of the detail or background behind it, save for quite superficially.
I think I maybe expected a little bit more having read numerous other books by the author.
Readable but not quite what I expected.
I think I maybe expected a little bit more having read numerous other books by the author.
Readable but not quite what I expected.
August 7, 2018
The author does a pretty good of making the creation of the magna carta as exciting as it can be, given it was 800+ years ago and there isn't a whole lot of documentation chronicling the events leading up to it. A good chunk of the book is the charter itself, however, which is pretty dull.
October 22, 2018
The best thing I can say about this book? It was a quick easy read.
The worst thing I can say about this book? It’s a toss up - facile analysis, reinforces myths about the period, and a serious lack of depth on a topic that has seen far better pop history then we receive here.
The worst thing I can say about this book? It’s a toss up - facile analysis, reinforces myths about the period, and a serious lack of depth on a topic that has seen far better pop history then we receive here.
January 3, 2019
Concise and not to dry book about the Magna Carta, with additional sources listed at the back if you want to read more. It has the 3 versions listed at the back for easy comparison with additional notes on the revisions.
April 10, 2020
This was okay. I now know more about the Magna Carta than I did before...but erudite! This is obviously a different meaning of the word erudite that I wasn’t previously aware of! The style was clunky to say the least..might have worked for a TV script but not in written form.
July 14, 2020
An extended history of the Magna Carta after 1215
Very interesting account of a little known aspect of the development of the Magna Carta. Rather scholarly, rather detailed. One to read rather than to treasure.
Very interesting account of a little known aspect of the development of the Magna Carta. Rather scholarly, rather detailed. One to read rather than to treasure.
February 15, 2023
Unless you already know the history of the Magna Carta and all the people involved, this is not the book for you. Author assumes you have detailed knowledge of the MC. I spend a lot of time googling names and places.
February 24, 2024
Interesting account of how the Magna Carta that we know today came to be, not just in 1215, but in subsequent versions in 1216 and 1225. I particularly enjoyed the side by side comparison of the different versions in the appendix.
August 31, 2018
Ended up being a quick read, but mostly disappointing. I thought I was going to get more of a tale, but mostly it was a dry history reading.
June 15, 2019
Very informative.
September 3, 2020
A superb introduction to medieval English politics.
March 10, 2022
ترجمهی بسیار بدی داره و عملا خواندن متن رو دچار مشکل میکنه.
May 3, 2022
A very readable history of the Magna Carta, a lot of which I did not know
November 29, 2023
Very quick overview if you want details, this book isn't it.
April 23, 2024
A good quick read with plenty of helpful information. Well written.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews