English Peasents Revolt of 1381

The Peasants' Revolt, Wat Tyler's Rebellion, or the Great Rising of 1381 was one of a number of popular revolts in late medieval Europe and is a major event in the history of England. Tyler's Rebellion was not only the most extreme and widespread insurrection in English history but also the best-documented popular rebellion to have occurred during medieval times. The names of some of its leaders, John Ball, Wat Tyler and Jack Straw, are still familiar in popular culture, although little is known of them.
The revolt later came to be seen as a mark of the beginning of the end of serfdom in medieval England, although the revolt itself was a failure. It increased awareness in the upper classes of the need for the reform of feudalism in England and the appalling misery felt by the lower classes as a result of their enforced near-slavery.

POINT OF DIVERGENCE.

Wat Tyler is joined by many more peasents from south east England including many veteren soldiers from the 100 year war (which some did in OTL), when Richard II and his cabinet meet Wat Tyler and his rebels at Smithfield Wat Tyler does not go forward to meet the King and the tense encounter turns nasty, The Peasents chage the King and his men while arrows from the Bowman rain down on the Kings entourage.
The King, The Mayor of London and the others with them are mown down and slaughterd by the Peasents.
On The Afternoon of 14 June, 1381 Richard II is dead as is his cabinet and the Rebels are in control of the City of London.

Wat Tyler decleres that Feudalism is over in England and that there shell be no more Aristocracy from this day on.

John Ball is made Arch-Bishop of Cantabury.

Where does it go from here?.
 
Wow! Where to start for what happens next.

Firstly I think it will depend on how much support Tyler can get from non peasants. He did get the support of the middle class in London before the meeting with Richard so it is possible that the uprising would become generally popular with the non aristocratic people in England.

There is the question of what Richards family will do, flee to France and plot to return, or try facing down the rebellion and taking on Tyler in a pitch battle.

Lets assume that Tyler has won a famous battle and defeated the aristocrats. I think that he would call for a Parliment along similar lines to that of De Montford a century before. With his ally as Arch Bishop and the church taking a reduced role in polictics he will be elected as Regent by parliment (too early for a president could be called Lord Protector?)

This would be backed by France as it removes the English claim to the throne, but I feel that England would be excommunicated by the Pope and troubles will follow.
 
It would be interesting to see how many people find the regicide to turn their sympathies against Tyler as well.

That's a a drastic thing to do.

One problem though. Okay so the tense encounter turns nasty. Fine. But then the peasants mow down Richard and all.

What, does Richard have no one with him to protect him?
 
The revolt already held the Tower of London, the main defensive possition in London and had executed several high ranking members of the Kings advisors, including the Lord Chancellor.

I can see that a rabble under very loose control could go mad and kill all enemies, including the young king Richard. Once this has happened there is no going back and the leaders of the revolt must either win outright or be hunted down and killed.
 
The revolt already held the Tower of London, the main defensive possition in London and had executed several high ranking members of the Kings advisors, including the Lord Chancellor.

But in the scenario where Richard comes out to meet Tyler, he's very likely to have people with him other than unarmed courtiers. Particularly if Tyler has more backing than OTL so there's more reason to be cautious.

I can see that a rabble under very loose control could go mad and kill all enemies, including the young king Richard. Once this has happened there is no going back and the leaders of the revolt must either win outright or be hunted down and killed.
Sure. Of course such a rabble is going to be seen as such, and some of the people not in the frenzy might themselves be repulsed by it.
 

Thande

Donor
The clever thing would be to capture the King and act in his name, which may not have been impossible

That was the goal of all peasant movements of this type. Killing the king would destroy all the sympathy you have with the public: given the political theories of the time, saying you want to kill the king is like saying you want to destroy the country you're living in. Even in the Civil War they only did it because there seemed to be no other way out due to Charles' duplicity. Wat Tyler's stated aim was to abolish the nobility and level society, except for the King and a single Archbishop who would rule everyone else.
 
Thanks for the Replies, keep them comming.

could a Roof Tyler like Wat Tyler set himself up as "Lord Protector" and rule England?, The Preasents revolt was mainly in Southern England so what about the Aristocracy of Northern England they may raise an Army to try and re-take the South?, and what would all this mean for Scotland?.
 
Richard rowed out to Smithfield from the Tower of London IIRC, and didn't leave his boat during the negotiations. They could fire arrows at him sure, but it's hard for peasants to charge a boat. They'd just drown en masse.

Also bear in mind (as others have said) that medieval rebellions weren't aimed at telling the King "support us or we overthrow you". They were much more aimed at proclaiming that the King had listened to faulty advise and should instead turn to the counsel of the public. If the rebels killed the King it would destroy their support base - the rebels didn't want to kill the King; their priests spent every waking hour on Sundays preaching sermons about how God decreed loyalty to your King as your primary function and that turning against your King was punishable by God sending you to Hell. A regicide would cause the English public to lynch mob Wat Tyler and the regicides, and his heir would ride into London escorted by an honour guard of tens of thousands of loyal peasants desperate to atone for the regicide by going out of their way to submit publicly and unconditionally to their new King. It's just how mindsets worked amongst the rank and file in this era.
 
I don't know how likely it is, but could you work with Richard not being allowed to meet with the Peasants at all, and the peasants trying to 'rescue' him. If you really want him to die than, he could be killed in the interior fighting, both sides claiming the other did it.

From there you could follow the Charles I likeness, if you really want to get rid of him altogether. Or Richard could remain venerated, but be very much a captive monarch, while the Protector had the real power.
 
My understanding, and I'm a modernist, is that the English peasantry was a mixture of pre-proletarian peasants in the Monestary areas with long period contracts; peasants working on modern corvee on farms with personal strips; and peasants working on pre-modern tithe and due on manorial strips with personal strips.

Attacking the manorial system in general at this point in time is going to result in theological innovations, and in the broad discrediting of the conception of the person of the ruler as representative of their rule—by destruction of the manorial evidence of this.

Give it 5 years of success, and Tyler is backed into a situation where the King Must Die.

Even if there's a general redistribution of land, combined with a successful heterodox "crusade" against orthodoxy in England, this is just a resettlement of land within existing feudal conditions. In fact, the accumulation of post-feudal property is going to be set backwards, and the constables (or whomever the Tylerite military leaders are) will slowly convert into permanent manorial lords. If the price of wool stays up and keeps up this may result in some innovation, but it'll be a delayed form of capitalist accumulation.

More interesting would be if Tyler abducts the bishops, executing a great number for treason, and resulting in a new orthodox church entire. I'm not deeply familiar with late medieval heterodoxy, but my understanding is that the reform demanded here wasn't institutional and within and of the church, but personal and within and without the institution (which was more or less irrelevant). So we might see accidental institutional reform by the execution of all those bishops against a change in personal reform.

yours,
Sam R.
 
Expect an attempt from outside to crush the rebellion. The other rulers don't want this to succeed.

There are also England's territories in France to consider -- what's happening over there?
 
Lets say that instead of the King being killed, Tyler captures him, and acts in his name. He seeks to abolish the nobility and level society, but how would he accomplish this? How would the Realm be administered?
 
The idea of capturing the King and acting through him certainly seems a better idea to me but either way I see Ball and Tyler with there heads on spikes come the end of their 'rule'
 
Top