Chapter 22
In This Chapter
● Picking out the reasons for the Peasants’ Revolt
● Fighting taxation with Wat Tyler
● Seizing the English throne with Henry Bolingbroke
The fourteenth century saw Medieval Europe buffeted by numerous wars, invasions, population movements and the devastating effects of the plague, later known as the ‘Black Death’, with the peasants bearing the brunt of these events. With little property of their own, they depended on the charity - and all too often the work bordering on exploitation - given to them by others to live. Life was harsh, brutal and for many short.
Peasants had always suffered more than other groups in society, but the fourteenth century saw attempts to change this situation. Across Europe, and particularly in England as I describe in this chapter, groups of peasants protested and took up arms to try and improve their lives. Yes, the peasants were revolting - and so watch out as you read on!
Getting Riled Up in England
In some ways England was slow to respond to the mood of unrest in Europe. Several other revolts took place before things came to a head in England (see the later sidebar ‘Of lettuce and liberty: Rebellion throughout Europe’). Still, the English Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 is probably the most famous of the revolts, due to its organisation and the threat that it posed to the monarchy.
All peasants aren't equal
The trouble with a word such as 'peasants' is that it suggests one large mass of poor people. In fact, the situation was more complicated. Peasant basically means 'one who works', indicating people who weren't rich enough in land to subsist only from the profits from their estates, but those who actually had to work for a living.
A huge variety of grades within the lower classes existed. For example, a yeoman, who worked what was called a yardland (around 30 acres), still had to work it for a living but was a world away from an unfree serf who would have had far less - possibly just a very few acres. Similarly, the lower classes also included freemen or husbandmen, collectively known as artisans, who although free from bondage to a lord still had to work to survive. Often they had trades, such as blacksmith or cooper (a maker of barrels) and owned the premises where they worked.
None of these people would have described themselves as peasants though because the word wasn't used at the time. True serfs were referred to as rustici (country dwellers) or villeins.
Rooting out the causes of revolt
The revolt was a long time coming, and many of the reasons had been smouldering away for generations, even centuries. Although specific triggers for the revolt did exist (as I describe in the later section ‘Taxing everyone’), the general cause was the terrible conditions that were imposed on the lower classes through serfdom. The revolt was also prompted by the sudden change to working conditions caused by the Black Death.
Serfing through life
Most lower-class people lived in a state of serfdom, which was the basis of the feudal system. Serfs, or villeins, were unfree peasants tied to working on the land on which they lived. They were forced to labour on the land of their master, taking on whatever tasks they were told to do and with no freedom to move elsewhere or right to seek other opportunities or higher wages. Landowners owned their serfs in almost the same way that they owned the land on which the serfs worked, in that they were valuable property. Serfs weren’t exactly slaves as they were able to run away, but doing so would leave them with very little option for what they could then do with their lives. Serfdom wasn’t quite slavery, but it wasn’t too far from it either.
The Black Death in the middle of the fourteenth century significantly shook up the system of serfdom. Millions of serfs died, resulting in labour shortages throughout England. Many serfs tried to seize this opportunity to move on and seek better wages elsewhere. Their mobility was a huge threat to the nobility, and in 1351 King Edward III passed the ‘Statute of Labourers’, which made switching positions illegal and set wages at a maximum level, based on amounts from before the Black Death in the 1340s. The statute was probably difficult to enforce, but it likely stopped many people from grabbing a newfound freedom.
Serfs were able, however, to free themselves from their bondage in a couple of ways: if their lords volunteered to free them or the serfs ran away. If after running away, they managed to live somewhere else for a year and a day, they were declared legally free. Sounds easy, right? Well, not quite. Serfs who fled their homes were legally barred from taking other work, and so they had an almost impossible time surviving anywhere else. Many serfs on the run ended up living in forests and becoming outlaws.
Taxing everyone
Whether people were villeins, serfs, artisans or yeomen, they were all affected by the Hundred Years’ War. Whilst the battles may have mostly taken place across the Channel, the taxes raised to fund the military campaigns were very much a problem for the English population. The conflict dragged on for a good part of the fourteenth century (check out Chapters 21 and 23) and was ruinously expensive for England.
Much of the war was financed on credit, with Edward III borrowing heavily from foreign bankers in Italy and the Low Countries. However, the money needed to be paid back and further cash raised. The only way to do that was through taxes. Eventually, in 1377, Edward raised money through a poll tax. The poll tax was set at a fixed amount regardless of an individual’s wealth and possessions, as opposed to an income tax based on what you earn or own.
In 1377 Edward III died and was replaced by his ten-year-old grandson Richard II. Richard’s advisors, in particular John of Gaunt (see Chapter 21 for more on him), wanted to raise funds to continue the war with France, and they almost tripled the first poll tax that was set in Richard’s name in 1381. The tax was raised from 1 groat (4 pennies) to 3 groats (12 pennies) and applied across the board with no exceptions. As far as many peasants were concerned, this rise was the last straw.
Telling the tax collector to fob off in Fobbing
Not paying the poll tax presented an easy way for people to protest. In many cases, they couldn’t pay it, and so refusing to do so was easy. According to accounts from the period, the first recorded incident of refusal to pay was in a village called Fobbing in Essex.
In May 1381 a man called John Bampton was sent to collect the taxes from Fobbing. The villagers refused to pay and were led in their protests by a man called Thomas Baker. Interestingly, Thomas Baker was a landowner and was considered a yeoman rather than a serf. When the local justice of the peace arrived to demand the cash, the villagers attacked him and sent him packing - the revolt was on!
Lollardy - The people's Church
At the same time as the peasantry in the south of England were refusing to pay tax, a whole new religious movement based on the equality of all human beings was growing in influence. Known as Lollardy, the movement was based upon the teachings of John Wycliffe (c. 1325-1384), who had been expelled from Oxford University in 1381.
Specifically, Wycliffe was expelled for his belief that the Roman Church had become corrupt and that the true Church was represented in the 'Community of Believers' who abstained from pomp and ceremony and based their lives purely on the Bible. One aspect of this belief was that the Bible needed to be translated into English and made available to all peasants to read and study. Lollards challenged whether the Church was any more capable of making a man into a good priest than through simple study of the Bible. They despised the rituals and mysticism of Roman church services and the mass, believing in simple community ceremonies.
Their views proved very timely. Along with Wat Tyler's economic challenge, Lollardy represented another way for peasants to challenge authority and call for the Church to be taxed and pay the dues being forced on to the poor.
The Lollards were proposing a kind of medieval socialism where all things were held in common. The chronicler Jean Froissart quotes the Lollard priest John Ball as follows:
My good friends, things cannot go on well in England, nor ever will until every thing shall be in common; when there shall be neither vassal nor lord, and all distinctions levelled; when the lords shall be no more masters than ourselves. How ill have they used us! and for what reason do they hold us in bondage? Are we not all descended from the same parents, Adam and Eve? and what can they show, or what reasons give, why they should be more the masters than ourselves? except, perhaps, in making us labour and work, for them to spend.
Interestingly, Froissart describes John Ball as the 'crazy priest' and those involved in the revolt as 'the evil-desposed', probably because his patron had been the English queen and the crown still perceived Lollards to be a threat. He was probably exaggerating a bit too. Lollardy survived long after the Peasants' Revolt, and many of its beliefs formed the basis for Protestant thought during the English Reformation.
Revolting with the peasants
The protest at Fobbing was the first act of peasant defiance. Within a few weeks, dozens of similar incidents occurred across the counties of Essex and Kent. Villagers didn’t stop at refusing to pay tax: they formed themselves into armed gangs, daring officials to press them for payment and in some cases marching to London to make their protests to the king and to parliament.
Ganging up with Wat Tyler
In June 1381, a large band of men formed in Kent under the charismatic leadership of Wat Tyler. Tyler and his Kentish men marched towards London and met up with the contingent from Essex before arriving in Blackheath, in south London, on 12 June.
Many others joined the protestors and great speeches were made, including one by John Ball, a campaigning Lollard priest (see the later sidebar ‘Lollardy - The people’s Church’). Despite the number of people massing on London, the situation didn’t degenerate into extreme violence. Sporadic attacks were made on specific properties, however, most of which belonged to or were associated with John of Gaunt, the 14-year-old King Richard Il’s uncle and chief advisor.
Sources at the time claim that the king himself rode out to meet the peasants on 14 June, at which point he was presented with their demands. These included the sacking of his advisors and the end to serfdom. Both sides agreed to meet again the next day.
Storming the Tower of London
Up to this point, the revolt in London was a peaceful affair, but all that changed in the blink of an eye. At roughly the same time that Wat Tyler and his party were meeting with Richard II, another group of protestors were making their presence felt in a far more dramatic fashion. In an incredibly violent episode, they attacked and burnt down several properties, including the Savoy Palace owned by John of Gaunt.
More astonishingly still the violent protesters stormed the Tower of London, the most significant of London landmarks associated with the monarchy. Unfortunately, various notable men heavily associated with the poll tax were inside the tower. Among the nobles rounded up and murdered were Simon of Sudbury, the Lord Chancellor and also the Archbishop of Canterbury, as well as Robert de Hales, the Lord Treasurer. The revolt had taken on a much more dramatic and sinister turn.
Doling out disaster at Smithfield and St John's Field
The following day the rebels again travelled to a public meeting with King Richard, on the site of the meat market at Smithfield. From the start, this meeting had a more fractious and unpleasant feel to it than the encounter with Richard II just a day earlier. Wat Tyler apparently arrived slightly drunk and the proceedings had a clear edge to them.
As he rose to speak to the king, Tyler was alleged to have drawn a dagger. At this point two men stepped forward and ran him through with their swords, mortally wounding him. When Tyler disappeared from view, the crowd went into uproar shouting out to ask where he was. At this point Richard II stood and made the memorable claim that ‘You shall have no captain but me.’ He then asked them to disperse and meet up again at St John’s Fields, which was then an area of agricultural land owned by the Church in south London.
Of lettuce and liberty: Rebellion in Europe
The Peasants' Revolt of 1381 in England certainly wasn't the only uprising during the fourteenth century. In Chapter 21, I discuss the Jacquerie in France, and several other significant uprisings occurred around this time as well:
● The Ivalyo Rebellion: In 1227, one of the most remarkable revolts - known as the Ivalyo rebellion - took place in Bulgaria. This uprising was arguably the most successful of all time. Ivaylo was the nickname of a swine-herder who proved to be an extremely charismatic leader. Given how badly he probably smelled, his charisma was fortunate! He was at the head of a peasant uprising that was so successful that it forced the nobility of Bulgaria to make him emperor! He proved good at that too, winning a series of military victories against the neighbouring Byzantine Empire. His luck ran out when some of his supporters turned on him, and he fled into the Mongol Empire where he was assassinated soon afterwards. For someone who had led such an adventurous life his nickname is curious; it means 'lettuce' in Bulgarian!
● The Flanders Uprising: Between 1323-1328, a peasant uprising occurred in Flanders. Like the 1381 revolt in England, the Flanders episode was caused by excessive taxation, this time imposed on the orders of Louis I, the Count of Flanders. Riots and violent protests followed for a number of years led by a farmer called Nicolaas Zannekin. Several towns were captured along with Louis I, who was imprisoned. Order was eventually restored by the French king, Charles IV, but not until the rebels were defeated by his successor Philip VI in 1328.
● The Estonian Revolt: Between 1343-45, a huge uprising took place in Estonia on the far eastern borders of the Holy Roman Empire. The Teutonic Knights had conquered the territory as part of their Crusading in Europe (see Chapter 16) and had imposed a German-speaking ruling class. In 1343 the indigenous people rose up in an anti-German and anti-Christian revolt. In one night, nearly 2,000 people were slaughtered and hundreds of churches burned. The Teutonic order retaliated in similar style and a guerrilla war resulted over the next two years before the revolt leaders were eventually hunted down and killed.
● The Revolt of the Ciompi: In 1378, Italy saw its own peasant uprising, the Revolt of the Ciompi. The ciompi were textile workers in Florence who weren't part of any trading guild and had no representation. Their uprising made demands for legal changes to give them greater representation. They forced themselves into power, with their leader Michele Di Lando assuming a major government post. Although initially successful, the revolt soon fell apart with infighting among the ciompi and other minor guilds, culminating in a deadly street fight. For a while at least, they did force a change in the government of Florence. A statue of Di Lando still stands today in the Loggia del Mercato Nuovo, in Florence.
All these revolts have one thing in common - they eventually failed. None of the rebel leaders were able to cope with a coordinated armed response from a government or monarch. They also show that by the fourteenth century the lower classes of Europe were pushing at the boundaries of their class systems in previously unseen ways. Revolutionary politics were born during this period and the leaders of these revolts became heroes for those who later pushed for political change.
Whilst the peasants were settling there a militia of around 7,000 was put together and fell on the rebels at St John’s Field. All the rebel leaders were arrested, including the Lollard priest John Ball (check out the earlier sidebar ‘Lollardy - The people’s Church’). Immediately any concessions made by the king were revoked.
The militia didn’t stop there either. Richard then took his troops to Kent to search out any further dissenters. Many were arrested, but in time the king relented as this contemporary chronicle describes:
Afterwards the King sent out his messengers into diverse parts, to capture the malefactors and put them to death. And many were taken and hanged at London, and they set up many gallows around the City of London, and in other cities and boroughs of the south country. At last, as it pleased God, the King seeing that too many of his liege subjects would be undone, and too much blood spilt, took pity in his heart, and granted them all pardon, on condition that they should never rise again, under pain of losing life or members [genitals], and that each of them should get his charter of pardon, and pay the King as fee for his seal twenty shillings, to make him rich. And so finished this wicked war.
In the end, around 1,500 rebels were arrested and condemned to death. The revolt was brutally ended and nothing tangible was achieved. What it did do, however, was show how dangerous a peasant uprising could be and many people cite it as the first event of radical British politics.
Regarding Henry IV: Bolingbroke Seizes Power
Richard II was able to claim that he successfully put down the 1381 Peasants’ Revolt, but that affair was only the beginning of his problems. Ever since his father had died, because of Richard’s young age a committee had in effect been ruling England. Powerful men who had served under Edward III advised Richard and ran the show. Sooner or later he was going to have to deal with their threat to his authority, but in fact that threat came from somebody else, his first cousin and childhood playmate, Henry Bolingbroke.
Perusing Henry's path to power
Henry was the son of John of Gaunt, who was the third son of Edward III and had been advising and pretty much controlling his nephew Richard II since he’d become king. Furthermore, John was most unpopular with the rebels of the Peasants’ Revolt because he’d been the main mover behind the hated Poll Tax.
Henry was born in 1366 at Bolingbroke Castle in Lincolnshire from which he took his name. He grew up at court alongside his cousin Richard. When Richard became king in 1377, Henry continued to be a part of the court because his father was effectively in charge.
Participating in an uprising and Crusading
In 1387 Richard II suffered the first internal uprising against him. The 21-year-old king was presented with a demand from parliament that he sack his chancellor Edward de la Pole. Richard refused and a coalition of knights formed against him. Henry was involved in this revolt, but when Richard successfully suppressed it, Henry wasn’t punished - instead he was elevated from an earl to a duke!
Although Henry escaped punishment, he may not have been totally confident that he wouldn’t eventually suffer reprisals because he spent most of the 1390s involved in Crusading activity in Europe. Between 1390-92, he fought with the Teutonic Knights against revolts in Lithuania, laying siege to the capital of Vilnius. The siege was unsuccessful and so Henry followed up with a journey to Jerusalem, which was no longer in Christian hands. These campaigns seem to have been a kind of training exercise in both war and political diplomacy, developing skills that Henry later put to great use during his own reign.
Going into exile
By the end of the fourteenth century, the relationship between Richard and Henry seems to have completely broken down. Richard was childless and also heavily in debt. Henry’s family group, the House of Lancaster, was a clear threat to the king; it was wealthy and had blood connections to the throne. In addition, Henry had returned from Europe as a famous warrior and politician. His potential was clear - as was his threat to Richard.
In December 1397 Henry became involved in a big argument with the Duke of Norfolk, Thomas de Mowbray, which was to be settled by a duel of honour.
To prevent bloodshed, Richard exiled both of them - Henry for ten years. He went to live in Paris - not a bad place to be exiled!
Making a comeback
Richard must have felt safe from the threat of Henry, but the feeling didn’t last long. In 1399 John of Gaunt died, and as his heir Henry expected to return home and take up his position. Instead, Richard disinherited Henry, exiled him for life and claimed the estates for the crown! Richard’s actions gave Henry the excuse he needed to stage a major comeback, and Richard pretty much brought it on himself.
Henry landed on the Yorkshire coast in June 1399 with only a small group of followers. Within a few weeks he had gathered together huge support across the country. Richard II was an unpopular king because of his cruel tax policies, and few now rose to defend him.
Desperately seeking Richard
Nobody is sure of the exact fate of Richard II. Historians know that he was imprisoned in the Tower of London and that shortly afterwards he was moved to Pontefract Castle in West Yorkshire. Henry had promised to spare his life and would probably have done so, but in the months after Henry assumed power, news of a counterplot emerged.
Several leading nobles including the Earls of Kent and Somerset were arrested and revealed, under torture, that they'd been plotting to assassinate Henry and reinstate Richard. Richard was unlikely to have been involved in the plot, but it must have suggested to Henry that he was too dangerous to be kept alive. Most historians agree that Richard died some time during February 1400, but how is unknown: poison or being left to starve to death are the most popular theories.
But the story doesn't end there. For years after his death rumours persisted that Richard was still alive - despite the fact that his body was publicly displayed in St Paul's Cathedral! A few years later a man emerged in Scotland claiming to be Richard and was used as the figurehead for several revolts. This man's identity isn't known, but many considered him mentally ill; he died in poverty in 1419. His is a curious tale that tells a great deal about the medieval mindset: clearly conspiracy theories were as popular then as they are today!
Richard had recently gone to Ireland on campaign and had to rush back to deal with the crisis. Eventually he met with Henry at Flint Castle in Wales. He agreed to abdicate on condition that his life was spared. He was immediately imprisoned in the Tower of London.
Although delayed by political problems, Henry’s coronation eventually took place in October 1399. England had a new king, Henry IV.
Muddling through an unhappy reign
After all the action and skulduggery that preceded it, Henry IV’s reign was a bit of a let down. He ruled for just 14 years and most of it was spent dealing with problems at home and potential revolts. His reign is important, however, because it paved the way for the succession of his son, Henry V and his famous campaigns in the resumption of the Hundred Years’ War (I discuss Henry V in more detail in Chapter 23).
Rebetting against the rebels
Henry IV came to the throne on the back of plot and rebellion, and he in turn suffered from similar events throughout his reign. (Check out the sidebar ‘Desperately seeking Richard’ for details of various plots against Henry.) Even more serious were his problems in Wales. In 1400 Owain Glyndwr proclaimed himself the Prince of Wales and its true ruler. The revolt that took place lasted for the whole of Henry’s reign and wasn’t concluded until 1415, when it was eventually put down by Prince Henry (also known as Henry of Monmouth and the future Henry V). Glyndwr was never captured and disappeared into hiding in 1412, never to return.
Equally serious was the revolt of Henry Percy, the Duke of Northumberland, and his son, also named Henry but better known as ‘Hotspur’ in 1403.
This revolt joined with Owain Glyndwr and the Welsh and put up Edmund Mortimer, a distant relative of Edward III, as an alternative king. This rebellion was extremely serious and drew a great deal of support from barons who were disenchanted with the king. The revolt was ended only by the Battle of Shrewsbury in July 1403, when Hotspur was killed. Again, the king’s son, Henry of Monmouth, led the defence.
Suffering war at home, enjoying peace abroad
Given the horrendous problems that Henry was having at home, he was probably relieved that the Hundred Years’ War was still suspended. In 1389, Richard II had signed a peace treaty with France that still held. Both France and England were experiencing huge domestic problems and weren’t ready for war. Although Henry had planned French campaigns, problems at home meant that they were never able to take place. Equally, France was hamstrung by the French king, Charles V, gradually losing his mind and challengers for the throne emerging. Unsurprisingly the peace treaty was regularly renewed and carried on until 1415.
Dying a rather messy death
Henry IV suffered bad health from early on in his reign. As time went on, he became progressively worse with more responsibility being handed over to his son. Initially, Henry IV suffered from a terrible skin disease that may have been a form of leprosy or some kind of psoriasis, but from 1405 onwards he began to suffer attacks that sound like epileptic fits. Eventually in March 1413 he died at the relatively young age of 47. His son, Henry of Monmouth, was already running the kingdom for all practical purposes, and so the transition was relatively smooth. On 9 April he was crowned Henry V. The Hundred Years’ War was about to start again!
A strange and unusual visitor
One remarkable foreign policy event did take place during the reign of Henry IV - a visit from the Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus. Manuel was the first Byzantine emperor to visit Western Europe, and in 1400 he travelled to both France and then England. He was trying to drum up military support for a war against the Ottoman Turks, who were carving their way through the old Byzantine Empire (as I describe in Chapter 24). While in England, Manuel stayed at Eltham Palace in Greenwich, and his wealthy exotic appearance amazed everybody at court. He left with funds from King Henry but no troops.