[MUSIC]When we've talked aboutwhat was in Magna Carta,we've seen that it'squite a long document.We've seen as well that to modern eyes,it's quite a rag-bag sort of document.Can we say anything abouthow it was drawn up?How it was drafted?How it was written?Unfortunately, these are ratherdifficult questions to answer.Because, no eye witness account ofthe events at Runnymede in the first twoweeks of June 1215 has come down to us.No one who was a participantin the events there has writtena day by day diary sort ofaccount of what happened.Our main narrative sources werewritten by the chroniclers andthe chronicles were writingin their monasteries at St Albalns or Bury St Edmunds for example, some years afterwardsand they were relying on hearsay.They had not been there themselves.Now we can infer a certain amount.We know that there was shuttle diplomacygoing on between the two sides.Remember we saw at Runnymede thatthe barons were based Staines,the king was based at Windsor.Envoys were going backwards andforwards between the two sides.Baronial delegationswere going to Windsor.It was all a bit like modernday shuttle diplomacy ofthe sort that US Secretaries ofState are so expert at these days.And the man who in June 1215 playedthe part of the American Secretaryof State was Stephen Langton,the Archbishop of Canterbury.A very clever and highlysignificant and influential figure.But can we go any further?Can we go beyond that?Well yes.With the aid of this copy ofMagna Carta in particular we can.Because what is important about thiscopy of Magna Carta that was preservedat Peterborough is that the copy ofMagna Carta transcribed within it, appearsto be copied from a discarded draftcreated in the course of the negotiations.We can picture what was goingon in early June, 1215.Draft after draft ofthe terms was drawn up.Barons would draw up a draft,Langton would take it to the king,the king would say, oh no,I'm not having that.I want that clause amended,I want that clause taken out.They'd go back,they'd come up with a fresh draft.The previous one would be thrown away.Then they'd argue about the second draft.And would be disagreementsbetween the two sides about that.That second draft would be cast away.And this went on and on until finallya compromise was thrashed outon which the two sides could agree.And what appears to have happenedis that those discarded early drafts weresometimes picked up by people involvedin the negotiations, taken back home andthen transcribed into a book of statutes,a book of laws, like this and that iswhat appears to have happened here.There are quite a number of drafts,copied into manuscripts a few years later.Perhaps by people thinking,in all good faith, that they werethe original agreed version, butwhich are in fact, discarded drafts.And when you look at these discardeddrafts, you can see significant, minor butsignificant variations in the wording,which allows us toeavesdrop on the negotiationsbetween the barons and the King.And just to take an example ofhow it works, I'm looking now ata clause which in the final agreedversion of the Charter became clause 55.And it relates to the makingof fines with the king.Now I should explain that the wordfine in the 13th century.And a different meaningfrom the word fine today.A fine today is a financialpenalty if you do something wrong.If you go outside into Piccadilly,and you park your car ona double yellow line you'll geta parking ticket and you pay a fine.Now a fine in the Middle Agesdid not mean that.A fine in the middle ages meant a sumof money which you paid to the kingto secure a favour, a concession from him.And that is the sense in whichfine is employed in Magna Carta.In the final version of the charter,it says very simply all fineswhich have been made with usunjustly will be remitted.That is to say, cancelled.Now, in this version which preserves adiscarded draft, the wording is different.It's more specific,it says all fines relating to dowers andmarriages, which would be made byus unjustly, will be remitted.You see, it's more specific.It says fines relating to dowers,that's the lands assigned to a widow andmarriages will be remitted.That was the baron's opening gambit.And in the final version,it was watered down.It became a fudge to meansomething much less specific.The King had won a significant concession.So we learned two main thingsfrom looking at the version ofthe Charter preserved in this copy.We learned first of all thatthe making of Magna Cartawas just like any politicalnegotiating process today.It involved give and take, it involvedone side making a concession, andanother side making a concession, untilfinally compromised terms were agreed.But what we also see, absolutelyfascinating in this is that right atthe last moment, the barons weremaking concessions to the king.We might suppose that itwould be the other around.That the king, at the losing end of a war,would be making concessions to the barons.And yes the King was making concessions,that happened.But equally the Baronswanted a deal as well.They wanted a quick deal,they wanted the struggle over.They were prepared tomake concessions too.And that is the big lesson we learnfrom this clause in Magna Carta.