Probably not, but hindsight is 20/20.
Wat Tyler's rebellion in 1381 was largely triggered by the poll tax levied to pay for the war with France, as well as the perception that the king's ministers (not the king himself!) were responsible for their economic misery and deserved to be punished---some said even beheaded. They also had some more general demands for reduced economic inequality.
But the rebellion was quite small, and failed very quickly; in about a month it was completely suppressed and the leaders were executed. Almost none of their demands were met, and in fact the government cracked down on peasants even harder, making things worse.
So, with the benefit of hindsight, it seems like the revolt was probably not a good idea. But at the time, that was probably a lot less clear. Other peasant revolts had succeeded to various degrees in the past; many of their objectives were sensible and popular; and even the targeting of the king's ministers rather than the king himself probably seemed like a sound strategy at the time. Even if they knew they probably wouldn't win, apparently enough people were simply fed up enough with the current system that they were willing to take the chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment