Wat Tyler

English reformer and rebel leader

• Born: Fourteenth century
• Birthplace: England
• Died: June 15, 1381
• Place of death: Smithfield, near London, England

Wat Tyler led a popular uprising, which, though suppressed, speeded the end of serfdom and focused the attention of the English people on the importance of personal freedom.

Early Life

Nothing is known about Wat Tyler’s early life, and even his occupation has been questioned. Some scholars follow the lead of the medieval French historian Jean Froissart, who reported in his Chroniques de France, d’Engleterre, d’Éscose, de Bretaigne, d’Espaigne, d’Italie, de Flandres et d’Alemaigne (1373-1410; The Chronycles of Englande, Fraunce, Spayne . . . , 1523-1525 better known as Chronicles) that Tyler had been a soldier in France; others even believe that he was an adventurer or a highwayman, placed by chance in a position of leadership. However, the early chroniclers were representatives of the establishment, and their assessment of Tyler’s character reflects their prejudices. Such later antiestablishment writers as Thomas Paine, author of The Rights of Man (1791-1792), were just as biased. Paine thus accepted without question the identification of Wat, or Walter, Tyler as a Deptford tiler, or roofer, who killed a tax collector for taking liberties with his daughter. Such an incident did occur; however, the hero was John Tyler, a man who in fact was from Dartford, not Deptford. Wat Tyler was probably also a tiler, just as his name would suggest. Such an opinion is supported by the fact that members of that craft were heavily involved in the uprising. Less prosperous than other artisans, they had reason to be unhappy with their lot, and as they were constantly moving from place to place, they could easily rally followers.

As for his place of residence, there is ample proof that Wat Tyler was not from Maidstone, in Kent, as some have said, but from Essex, probably from Colchester. There he would surely have known John Ball, a priest excommunicated for his stand against oppression. It has been said that Ball was the soul and voice of the Peasants’ Revolt and Wat Tyler its sword.

Life’s Work

Tyler appeared on the stage of history on June 7, 1381, when he became the leader of the Peasants’ Revolt, and he departed from it just eight days later, on June 15, when he was killed in the presence of King Richard II. However, it is not improbable that popular leaders like Tyler had been planning the uprising for some time, for widespread discontent had been building in England for several decades. In rural areas, the shortage of labor as a result of the Black Death had persuaded serfs and free workers alike that they were essential to society and deserved better treatment. In the cities, artisans and the unskilled were increasingly resentful of their exploitation by merchants. Ordinary Englishmen resented being conscripted for service in foreign wars and taxed to support a corrupt government. When Parliament in 1380-1381 passed a poll tax to be collected from every adult in England, rebellion ensued; despite the name, the revolt was not limited to peasants but also included serfs, free laborers, artisans, clerks, friars, and even merchants.

Although some scholars believe that the uprising was spontaneous, the fact that it broke out at approximately the same time in so many different areas of England suggests that it may have been well planned. In any case, it erupted on May 30, 1381, when a hundred men drove the king’s commissioner out of Brentwood, Essex. Within a couple of days, Essex and Kent were in arms. On June 5, men gathered at Dartford began a march toward Maidstone. Wat Tyler may have been among the Essex men who made this journey. Certainly he was at Maidstone, for it was there on June 7 that the assembled captains named him their leader. Thereafter, Tyler served both as the military commander of the rebels and their spokesperson when at last they met with the king.

The qualities that made Wat Tyler a good leader his intelligence, his strength of personality, and his talent for organization, with which he is credited even by those writers most hostile to his cause soon became evident. It took just two days for Tyler to shape his army and move on to Canterbury, where his troops sacked the castle of the archbishop, Simon Sudbury, who was also the chancellor of England. The rebels destroyed tax documents, freed prisoners, and executed several men they considered traitors. Tyler then consolidated his control by leaving some of the local recruits to hold the town thus brought under the rebels’ control.

Tyler was undoubtedly responsible for coordinating the two contingents, that from Essex and his own from Kent, so that they arrived outside London at the same time. By June 12, there were sixty thousand men encamped outside the city, and more were on the way. Moreover, although the mayor of London, Sir Thomas Walworth, was determined to resist, many Londoners were sympathetic with the rebels, as one of Walworth’s emissaries admitted in a secret meeting with Tyler.

From the beginning, the insurgents had insisted that they were loyal to the young king and wished only to clear out the traitors who surrounded him. Realizing that he was probably the only person who could placate the rebels and persuade them to disperse, Richard finally agreed to meet with them. On June 13 and on the two days that followed, the king issued forth from the Tower of London, where he had taken refuge, and met with Tyler in front of the thousands under the rebel leader’s command.

At the first of these meetings, there was no negotiation at all. Richard had proceeded by barge to the Greenwich shore, but when the men on the bank began to shout threats at those close to the king, someone in the royal party ordered the boats back to the Tower. Interestingly, Tyler’s men did not fire a single arrow. Their restraint may have been because of the monarch’s presence, but more probably, it indicates how well Tyler could control his men.

After a vague document sent by the king to the rebels was summarily rejected, a second meeting was set up. On Friday, June 14, Richard rode out to Mile End, where Tyler and his men were waiting. The king immediately agreed to the rebels’ demands including the abolition of serfdom, freedom to trade and negotiate, and amnesty for the rebels and even promised to hand over those on their list of traitors for suitable punishment.

However, the rebels were already in London, burning palaces and beheading those they blamed for their misfortunes. More bloodshed ensued, along with widespread looting. Whether Tyler himself led a gang of arsonists and murderers, as his enemies charged, or whether he attempted to restrain his men will never be known. It is a matter of record that some men were put to death for looting. At any rate, by the time of the meeting on Saturday morning, June 15, Richard was ready to halt the uprising, whatever the cost.

Armed only with a dagger and accompanied by just one of his men, Tyler rode out to talk with the king. There are many different accounts of what happened then. Some say that Tyler grew unmannerly toward the monarch and that he picked a quarrel with one of the king’s retainers and attacked him. However, others insist that Tyler was merely naïve, treating the monarch as a friend, and that he reacted to an insult as any man would, not suspecting that it was all part of a carefully orchestrated plot. Certainly, Tyler did draw his dagger, but he was immediately surrounded, then stabbed by Walworth and another of the king’s men. Tyler managed to break away, and he spurred toward his men crying “treason,” but before he could reach them, he fell to the ground and died. Tyler’s men were thrown into confusion; when the king came toward them and asked them to disperse, they obeyed. Later, Walworth sought out Tyler’s body, cut off his head, and bore it off on his lance, presumably to persuade the insurgents that the rebellion was finished. After the usual executions, those in power assumed that it all could be forgotten.

Significance

Though Tyler’s background, his character, and his motivations will always remain matters for conjecture, there is no doubt that though John Ball may have provided the ideology of the Peasants’ Revolt, Tyler was responsible for its phenomenal success. However, a protest is one thing; formulating a new society is quite another. Realistically, when Wat Tyler died, his movement had done as much as it could do. His rural followers were on the road home, where they had families to support and crops to tend. His Londoners were tired of bloodshed. Soon all he would probably have had left were those who thrived on disorder, over whom he probably would have had little control.

Nevertheless, Tyler left his mark on history. One must credit him for so ordering his forces that their uprising was far less violent than most similar rebellions, such as the French Jacquerie movement (also a peasants’ revolt) of 1358. Moreover, although those who held the power in England became even more repressive after the revolt, there were signs that the people had been heard. For example, the idea of a general poll tax was dropped, and before long laborers were being permitted to negotiate their own wages. It is also thought that the fear of another revolt hastened the end of serfdom. Perhaps Tyler’s most important legacy, however, is an intangible one. After the uprising of 1381, never again could the English people be persuaded that they had no value. From this time on, they would raise their voices demanding personal freedom and, like Wat Tyler, they would die for it if necessary.

Bibliography

Dobson, R. B. The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. London: Macmillan, 1970. A collection of documents presenting contemporary accounts of the Peasants’ Revolt, as well as later interpretations of its significance. Each selection is preceded by a commentary. Numerous references to Tyler are accessible through an excellent index. Extensive bibliography.

Dunn, Alastair. The Great Rising of 1381: The Peasants’ Revolt and England’s Failed Revolution. Stroud, Gloucestershire, England: Tempus, 2002. Novelistic rendition of the uprising. Color illustrations, bibliography, index.

Fryde, E. B. Peasants and Landlords in Later Medieval England: c. 1380-c. 1525. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996. A social history of rural England during the century that led up to the Tyler uprising and beyond. Illustrations, bibliography, indexes.

Hill, Douglas, comp. The Peasants’ Revolt: A Collection of Contemporary Documents. 1968. Reprint. Amawalk, N.Y.: Jackdaw, 1998. A study guide accompanies facsimile reproductions of a map, a pamphlet, and transcripts.

Hilton, R. H. Bond Men Made Free: Medieval Peasant Movements and the English Rising of 1381. 1973. Reprint. New York: Routledge, 1988. A section on the medieval economic system, explaining why it made revolt almost inevitable, is followed by a detailed account of the events of 1381. It is argued that while the peasants failed to achieve most of their aims, their vision of freedom changed the direction of British society.

Hilton, R. H., and T. H. Aston. The English Rising of 1381. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Included in this collection are essays on urban rebellion, both in England and in the rest of Europe, as well as on the more familiar subject of unrest among peasants. Though there are only a few references to Tyler, the volume contains helpful background information.

Justice, Steven. Writing and Rebellion: England in 1381. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Examines six texts by rebels in the uprising, which, the author argues, demonstrate a cohesive insurgent ideology.

Lindsay, Philip, and Reg Groves. The Peasants’ Revolt: 1381. 1950. Reprint. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1974. An admirable volume, written in a vivid, dramatic style but evidencing the most painstaking research and evaluation of historical evidence. Tyler is seen as a brilliant leader, not the oaf or rogue that aristocratic writers of his own time liked to think him. Illustrations and bibliography.

Oman, Charles. The Great Revolt of 1381. 1906. Reprint. London: Greenhill, 1989. A detailed narrative by an early scholar whose opinions are quoted, though not always seconded, by serious students. Includes two helpful maps and a number of appendices containing records, statistics, and documents.

Tuchman, Barbara W. A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978. Sees the Peasants’ Revolt as an expression of a growing passion for personal freedom, influenced by the preaching of men such as John Wyclif and John Ball. Tyler is pictured as a demagogue, power-crazed and increasingly violent, whose death came in consequence of his own rashness. The author’s comparison of the English uprising to Continental rebellions is of particular interest.