Talk:Peasants' Revolt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Middle Ages Icon
Middle Ages Portal
Peasants' Revolt is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peasants' Revolt article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] (killing millions)

Removed the reference to the Black Death "killing millions" in 1348, since it was vague and excessive, or a guess. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_of_England the population of England decreased from 3,750,000 to 2,500,000 during this period, a difference of 1.25 million.

[edit] June 14

An event mentioned in this article was a selected anniversary on June 14 2006.

[edit] Title

This page title is confusing. I think there needs to be a way to distinguish this from the German Peasant's Revolt of 1525, which is more important. Should the revolts be categorized by date? By location?

-Alex S

The Title is not confusing, the English uprising is known as the Peasant's Revolt, the German uprising some 150 years later is almost always referred to as the Peasant War, it was a far, far larger conflict.

[[Trotboy 22:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)]]

The title is not confusing in terms of which event it refers to, but it is inaccurate. Very few historians now would accept the label 'Peasants' Revolt', since members of the lower orders of the clergy and London townspeople (not to mention the burgesses of Cambridge) were involved. However, I don't reccommend changing the title because it's known to non-specialists (ie most people) as the 'Peasants' Revolt'. The common alternative, 'the 1381 risings', is too obscure for most people, I think. - DH
Agreed, titles of articles are a matter of convenience, to allow for the widest audience to understand what it means (see Medieval science, there was no "science" in the Middle Ages). The opening paragraph provides alternative names and clarifications. -- Stbalbach 13:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I've now noted the general context, which is popular revolt in late medieval Europe, in the heading. A better title for this article would not be capitalized and would be dated: English peasants' revolt of 1381. Would there be any objections to such a title, if I fixed the redirects? --Wetman 17:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
It depends on your perspective - as an editor, your right, English peasants' revolt of 1381 fits the scheme of things better and is more logical. As a general reader, Peasants' Revolt is how most people know it by. --Stbalbach 20:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Peasants' Revolt would remain as a redirect, of course: let no one be left behind. --Wetman 01:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Six weeks later: any objections to English peasants' revolt of 1381? --Wetman 06:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds ok to me. In fact we could even make Peasants' Revolt (and Peasants Revolt and permutations) a disambiguation page, since outside an English history context it has more meanings. -- Stbalbach 15:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). It's generally referred to as the Peasants' Revolt, and I don't see any reason why that shouldn't be the title. It's a proper name (like the Second World War, the Wars of the Roses and the Rising of the North) and so should be capitalised. And it may not be entirely accurate, but then these things seldom are: the Hundred Years' War didn't last 100 years, and the War of 1812 didn't just take place in 1812. Proteus (Talk) 15:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This is controversial, there are many things on Wikipedia that have been called Peasants Revolt, it is confusing and leads to disambiguation problems. Restoring to previous until there is consensus. -- Stbalbach 16:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I can only see two, this and 1907 Romanian Peasants' Revolt, which seems quite happy there. All the others seem to be called different things. This is undoubtedly the primary topic for this particular name in the English-speaking world. Proteus (Talk) 16:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Many things can be called a "peasant revolt", either colloquially or directly. See Popular revolt in late medieval Europe. They all have various and different names depending. I'm happy to go with whatever consensus says on this as good arguments can be made either way. -- Stbalbach 16:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
But this isn't called "a peasant revolt", it's called "the Peasants' Revolt" (it is also, of course, "a peasant revolt", "a peasants' revolt", "a popular revolt", and many other things, but they aren't its name). Articles are generally named by the name of a subject, if it has one, not by a description of it (which is what the current title is). And while there are other similar revolts, they are all generally referred to by more specific names, whereas this is simply called "the Peasants' Revolt" (in the English-speaking world, obviously). And there's no need for Peasants' Revolt to be a disambig page — we already have one at a different name, and it's been a redirect for six months pointing to the very article that's apparently not allowed to use it as a title... (Of course it would be difficult to change it from that, since so many articles link to it expecting to get here, which is a good indication that this is indeed the primary topic and thus not in need of disambiguation.) Proteus (Talk) 17:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
peasant revolt is a dab page which lists all the revolts and wars that could be easily confused when someone types in the general term "peasant revolt". The redirect of "Peasants' Revolt" to this article is fine for anyone who types in the correct term "Peasants' Revolt" (with the apostrophe and Capitalization). The end goal of article naming is to decrease confusion and make it easier for the user to find what they are looking for. With the current arrangement anyone who types in "Peasants' Revolt" will get to the assumed right place (here), anyone who types in "peasant revolt" will get to a dab page which then lists the more specific name. However, if this article was called "Peasants' Revolt", it would increase confusion because it is so similar to peasant revolt which is a dab page. This is kind of similar to the Norman Conquest -- which one? Normally when people say Norman Conquest, they mean the one of England, but there are others, so the article is called more properly Norman Conquest of England. But "Norman Conquest" still redirects to Norman Conquest of England since that is what most people know it by. -- Stbalbach 15:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
That article's at the wrong place too. I can see why people might want to do it this way, but it's simply not the way Wikipedia policy says it's supposed to be done. Variants are supposed to redirect to the most commonly used name, not vice versa. Proteus (Talk) 17:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
<--continued..

Your probably right. The contradiction of the rules is this: we would have Peasants' Revolt (article) and Peasant revolt (dab page) which are two different articles, yet they are too closely named for dab purposes and easily confused, which is the reason this article was renamed, to adhere to the Dab MoS on that point. Probably the correct solution is to do the following:

  1. Rename this article to Peasants' Revolt
  2. Rename Peasant revolt to Peasant revolt (disambiguation)
  3. Redirect other permutations of "peasants revolt" to Peasant revolt (disambiguation).

Let me know what you think. -- Stbalbach 23:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

That would seem ok, but I'm not sure it's necessary. I think Peasants' Revolt is different enough to peasant revolt that that the latter can be validly used as a redirect on its own. Proteus (Talk) 10:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Details on how third poll tax differed from earlier ones?

The third poll tax, unlike the two earlier, was not levied on a flat rate basis (as in 1377) nor according to schedule (as in 1379), but in a manner that appeared more arbitrary and hence unfair.

Can someone expand on this? --Jim Henry | Talk 21:38, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

  • The Chronicles of Froissart, Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library "I will speak thereof as it was done, as I was informed, and of the incidents thereof. There was an usage in England, and yet is in divers countries, that the noblemen hath great franchise over the commons and keepeth them in servage, that is to say, their tenants ought by custom to labour the lords' lands, to gather and bring home their corns, and some to thresh and to fan, and by servage to make their hay and to hew their wood and bring it home. All these things they ought to do by servage, and there be more of these people in England than in any other realm. Thus the noblemen and prelates are served by them, and especially in the county of Kent, Essex, Sussex and Bedford. These unhappy people of these said countries began to stir, because they said they were kept in great servage, and in the beginning of the world, they said, there were no bondmen, wherefore they maintained that none ought to be bond" + *"Wat Tyler's Rebellion", from The Chronicles of Froissart, , pp 61-63 includes John Ball's speech.

- + *"King Richard punishes the rebels in Kent" from The Chronicles of Froissart, edited by Steve Muhlberger, Nipissing University. - *John Ball's speech "Ah, ye good people, the matters goeth not well to pass in England, nor shall not do till everything be common, and that there be no villains nor gentlemen, but that we may be all united together, and that the lords be no greater masters than we be. What have we deserved, or why should we be kept thus in servitude? We be all come from one father and one mother, Adam and Eve: whereby can they say or show that they be greater lords than we be, saving but they cause us to win and labour for that which they spend? They are clothed in velvet and camlet furred with grise, and we be vestured with poor cloth: they have their wines, spices and good bread, and we have the rye, the bran and the straw, and drink water: they dwell in fair houses, and we have the pain and travail, rain and wind in the fields; and by that that comes from our labours they keep and maintain their estates: we are called their bondmen, and unless we readily do them service, we are beaten; and we have no sovereign to whom we may complain, nor will hear us nor do us right. Let us go to the king, he is young, and shew him what servitude we be in, and show him how we will have it otherwise, or else we will provide us some remedy; and if we go together, all manner of people that be now in any bondage will follow us with the intent to be made free; and when the king sees us, we shall have some remedy, either by fairness or otherwise." + - + - *The End of the Revolt "After the executions of Tyler, Jack Straw, John Ball, William Lister, Walker and several others at London, the people being appeased, the king resolved to visit his bailiwicks, castlewicks, and stewardships, in order to punish the wicked and to recover the letters of pardon which had been forced from him, as well as to place the realm in its proper situation. The king issued a secret summons for a certain number of men at arms to assemble at a fixed place, on a particular day, which was done. They amounted to five hundred spears and as many archers. When they were thus assembled, the king set out from London, attended only by his household, and took the road to Kent, for in that quarter the rebellion had first broken out. These men at arms followed the king, but did not accompany him. The king entered the county of Kent, and came to a village called Comprinke, when he had the mayor and all the men of the village called before him. On their being assembled in an open space, the king ordered one of his council to remonstrate with them, how much they had erred against him, and that they had nearly thrown England into desolation and ruin; and because this mischief must have had some advisers who had encouraged them in their wickedness, and it must be supposed that all were not equally guilty, it was better that the ringleaders should suffer than the whole; his majesty demanded that those should be pointed out who had been so culpable, under pain of incurring his indignation for ever, and being considered as traitors. When those present heard this harangue, and saw that the innocent might escape by pointing out the guilty, they looked at each other, and then said: "My lord, here is one by whom this town was first put into confusion and excited to rise." He was immediately seized and hanged; as were seven others. The letters patent which had been granted were demanded back: when they were given up, the king's officers tore them in pieces before their eyes, and cast them away, and then said, -- "We command all ye who are here assembled, in the kings' name, and under pain of death, to depart, every one peaceably to his own home; and that you never rebel more against the king, nor against his ministers. By the punishment that has been inflicted, your former evil deeds are pardoned." The people cried out with one voice, "God bless the king and his good council." They acted in the same manner ...in the different part of England where the people had rebelled; so that upwards of fifteen hundred were beheaded or hanged. " WAS 4.250 21:01, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] need expansion

Might want to get into how this and other revolts up through the reformation affected political thought then and since. It;s all quite important to marxist historiography. Dan Knauss

Popular revolt in late medieval Europe, a more general article, though not covering that aspect yet. --Stbalbach 21:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy needed

Anyone for added another section about the legacy of the revolt? Dermo69

[edit] Trigger

Added a section on Brentwood, and the actions that lead to the formation of the revolt. Duellist

[edit] recent additions

I reverted the recent additions. They are poorly written for one and I don't think really improved what is here. Also the social factors about the black death etc are general to all revolts and discussed in the popular uprising article. -- Stbalbach 00:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] semi-protection needed?

Hi. we have had about 5 or 6 unhelpful edits in the last hour or so, anyone think we should go for semi-protection of this article? Thanks! ACBestMy Contributions 17:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for expansion

For a such a significant event in history, there really is more that could be said about this. Mrmoocow 10:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I was reviewing this for Version 0.7; I think it needs some work & more content before it's ready, though it's certainly getting there. Walkerma 03:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brentwood or Fobbing?

The BBC web site (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/voices/voices_revolt.shtml) says "The Peasants' Revolt began in the Essex village of Fobbing in May 1381. It started with the arrival of a royal tax commissioner, John Bampton, enquiring into evasion of the new poll-tax. As a JP and former sheriff of Essex, Bampton was typical of the local notables against whom the risings were directed. Supported by men from nearby villages the rebellion had begun." The current article gives roughly the same events, but places them in Brentwood. Does anyone have access to a good source that can help? Rjm at sleepers (talk) 09:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC) I will edit the section based on a Google Books entry. Probably deserves a better source if one is available. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 10:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC).


I have come across many articles and as a history student have been taught that it was Fobbing. I have just added a reference to it on the page itself.

[edit] The last poll tax?

The Poll Tax article says "The poll tax was essentially a lay subsidy (a tax on the movable property of most of the population) to help fund war. It had first been levied in 1275 and continued, under different names, until the 17th century." Thus, according to Wikipedia, poll taxes continued to be levied after the Peasant's revolt. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 06:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tempore Rumoris

The term "Peasants' Revolt" is one coined by historians in the nineteenth century and is un unreflective of the variety of rebels. Wat Tyler and John Ball both came from large towns, and townsmen and low clergy were numerously included in the ranks of those rebelling. In Norfolk there is an uncommon example of members of the titled gentry joining in as two knights and an esquire were among those in revolt.

Contemporary commentators refered to to the events as "Tempore Rumoris" or "The time of whispers/rumours". This epithet reflects much more effectively the widespread criticism levelled at governmental activity during the period, and is irrespective of any social distinctions between those taking part and indeed those who may well have passively supported the rebels too.

- MJC -  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.195.8 (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)