The first sign of revolt had come more than a year earlier. In Sept. 1212, on his way to a Welsh expedition, John was warned both by his daughter, Joan, wife of Llewylyn of Wales, and by the king of Scots, that his barons were planning to betray him to the Welsh. He abandoned the expedition and Robert Fitz Walter and Eustace de Vesci, a prominent Northern baron, left the country. They persuaded the pope that they were suffering for righteousness' sake, and came back with other exiles when John and Innocent were reconciled in 1213. The reconciliation brought to England the new archbishop, Stephen Langton, who returned to his native land with the intention of using his position as chief advise' of the king to compel him to restore good govern ment to the land. John was absolved after swearing on the Gospel that he would love, defend and maintain the Church, restore the good laws of his predecessors, particularly Edward the Confessor, do away with bad laws, judge all men according to the just judg ments of his court, and give to every man his rights. The king then prepared to sail to Poitou, leaving the archbishop and justiciar in control of the administration to give effect to his promises. At St. Albans, early in August, they took the first steps towards the restoration of good government. Later in the month, at St. Paul's, the first suggestion that a charter should be demanded seems to have been made by the archbishop, who apparently did not know of the existence of Henry I.'s coronation charter. Langton real ized at once that a formal charter was the best way of securing reforms in the administration, and John's observance of them. He took a few of the leading barons aside, read them Henry I.'s charter and suggested that it should be the basis of their pro gramme. He must also have discussed the needs of the country with the justiciar and the other judges. In all probability the actual drafting of some of the clauses of the charter was begun by such men in private talk at this time.
John, in the meantime, had forgotten his promises in his just rage against the northern barons, who should have been awaiting him on the south coast, ready to embark to France. He found all in confusion there and. obliged to put off his expedition, turned north determined on vengeance. The archbishop pursued him, catching him up at Northampton and pointing out that the occa sion demanded that the northern barons should be tried in the king's court and not punished till they had been found guilty.
Though he resented the archbishop's interference, John gave way.
It was this crisis combined with the new idea of a charter that probably gave occasion for a compilation known as "the unknown charter of liberties." Not mentioned by any contemporary, the document was unknown until the last century. There is no evi dence that it was anything more than a basis for discussion or an attempt to draft the baronial demands. It contains none of those clauses characteristic of the later charter, which attempt adminis trative reforms and link Magna Carta rather with the Statutes of Edward I. than with the charters of Henry I. and Stephen. The Crisis.—By whatever means it was secured, some com promise must have been made, for the king departed on Feb. 2, 1214, on his last expedition to Poitou, and during his absence no active steps were taken against him, although a demand for a scutage of three marks, issued from abroad, roused bitter resent ment. When John returned defeated, all parties felt that the time
had come to insist on definite guarantees for the future. John met the barons at Bury St. Edmunds on Nov. 4, 1214, and received a definite refusal to pay the scutage. After the king had departed they solemnly swore to withdraw their allegiance from him unless he would confirm their liberties by charter. They agreed to pre sent their demands soon of ter Christmas, and in the meantime to prepare for war. John tried to win over his ecclesiastical oppon ents by issuing, on Nov. 21, a charter to the Church, in which he granted freedom of election. On Jan. 6 the barons put before the king at the Tower general demands that a charter should be issued on the lines of Henry I.'s charter, but incorporating admin istrative reforms which some at least of the barons desired. The archbishop and William Marshall. earl of Pembroke, were anxious for reform without war. Through their mediation John secured a truce till Easter. On Jan. 15, he reissued the charter to the Church, and ordered the sheriffs in every county to take oaths of allegiance to the king. Both sides appealed to the pope and the king took the cross. The pope had a double reason for protecting him; he was both a vassal and a crusader.
In Easter week the barons met at Stamford to force a charter from the king. Contemporary chroniclers emphasize the fact that the backbone of the resistance was a group of northern barons; but to label the baronial resistance as northern is inaccurate, as the contemporary chroniclers themselves imply. In Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex it was particularly strong; the great men of Essex and Hertfordshire, the earl of Essex, the earl of Oxford, Robert fitz Walter, were almost to a man against the king, and with them were joined many barons of the second rank and men of rich knightly families from the other three eastern coun ties. The midland counties supplied such great names as William d'Albigny and John, the constable of Chester and the west, the Fitz Alans, and Fulk fitz Warin. From the south-west came Will iam Malet and William de Montecute. That fewer supporters for the baronial party should come from the south-west, the northern midlands, and the honour of Lancaster was natural, since these were John's own lands. That the opposition should be stronger in the south-east is again to be expected. The men of Essex were more nearly in touch with modern thought, and mod em thought was much occupied with the duties of the king. But John's enemies were everywhere. John had, however, certain sup porters among the greatest barons in the land. The earl of Ches ter, almost a sovereign prince himself, could do no other than take the king's side, though one may suspect that he approved the charter, since he issued a comprehensive charter to his own men at some phase in the struggle, a document known as the Magna Carta of Chester. The earl of Pembroke, a man grown old in the service of the royal house, the earl of Salisbury, half brother to the king, the earl of Warrenne, the earl of Arundel, and earl Fer rars were all on the royal side, but Ralf of Coggeshall tells us that even when a baron supported John his knights were generally on the other side.