The popular rising of 1381, known most commonly as the Peasants' Revolt, was a dramatic culmination of the crisis of the fourteenth century. While Medieval society was in a decline, this period was still very much an age of faith. The English Rising of 1381 cannot therefore be separated from its religious causes and inspirations. The effects of Wycliffe's heresy on the English commons and the revolutionary theology and direct leadership of John Ball were essential to the revolt. Contemporary accounts of the revolt depict a movement characterized by religious imagery and violent attempts to purge the established Church of corruption. Religious causes and motivations were not peculiar to the insurgents, however. The established order found itself defending the Church along with the realm from diabolical anarchy. Thus, every aspect of the Peasants' Revolt and its suppression was inspired and guided by strong religious forces that were necessary to any broad social movement in medieval society.

Contemporary writers and historians writing soon after the revolt were eager to lay the blame for the uprising on the heresy of John Wycliffe and his suspected theological connection to the preacher and revolutionary John Ball. More recent historians, without anti-heresy agendas to fulfill, have concentrated on the social and economic causes of the revolt, often leaving out religious interpretations. They have pointed out that Wycliffe himself condemned the revolt soon after it ended (Dobson, 373). It has also been stated that the peasants did not fulfill the broad egalitarian program demanded by Ball once they had gained the advantage (Hilton, 65). It is generally agreed upon that the direct causes of the revolt were economic and social. It was the Statute of Labourers and the three successive poll taxes that enraged the commons of England. However, as stated earlier, this was still an age of faith, and Christianity inspired and guided all aspects of life, including insurrection. The rural and urban poor had always lived in oppressive conditions, and the Statute of Labourers, unlike the poll taxes, was instituted long before the revolt. The revolt was a widespread social movement that included not just downtrodden peasants but also "prosperous peasants," urban tradesmen and laborers, and priests (Hilton). A widespread social movement with such broad support could not have taken place in Medieval England without the assurance that they were fulfilling the will of God rather than going astray from Him. Therefore, the importance of Wycliffe's unintended inspiration, Ball's leadership, and the religious and moral indignation of the insurgents all play a crucial and necessary role in the 1381 rising.

Wycliffe was the first major English heretic since Pelagius. While his theology did not incite or cause the revolt directly, the fact that the rising of 1381 occurred during the time of his writings was not a coincidence. Wycliffe studied and wrote at a time when the bishops and abbots of the Catholic Church held vast estates in England and collected large amounts of taxes in the form of tithes from even their poorest tenants. Officials of the Church held important and powerful positions in the royal government, such as the chancellor, Simon of Sudbury, who was at the same time archbishop of Canterbury. Wycliffe wanted a reformed church that renounced its worldly interests and ministered to the people (Lindsay, 53). Wycliffe was known to preach his doctrines on disendowment of church wealth publicly (Justice, 82). More importantly to the cause of revolt, he preached and published publicly that Christ "walked in painful poverty" (quoted in Justice, 83) and that the church should follow His example. In Wycliffe's work Speculum, where he protested the taxation of the poor, he wrote, "What greater injustice could be conceived, than that the king and his nobles ... spoil the poor of the things they need to live?" (quoted in Justice, 85). This writing was circulated in England in 1380, the year of the third consecutive poll tax that soon led to the uprising. When Wycliffe wrote -as published in his Opera Minora- that a church official that abuses wealth has no right to keep that wealth, he was directing this statement to the king and nobles of England. Wycliffe supported secular government, and certainly did not wish for the general population to rise and take church property. However, the peasant and laboring classes who were exposed to Wycliffe's doctrines by broadside, Wycliffe's own preaching, and the preaching of resentful poor priests were more than eager to apply the message to themselves (Justice, 88-90).

These "poor priests" served to enhance the effect of Wycliffe's heresy on the general population. The Black Death had seen a high mortality rate among churchmen, and parish priests were more likely to have humble peasant origins. They lived among and ministered to the rural poor, and suffered under the Statute of Labourers and poll taxes just as any peasant did. The wandering "poor priests" had their effect as well, using certain doctrines taught by Wycliffe to incite the populations of the countryside and towns (Lindsay, 65). Langland complained of the wandering poor preachers when he described their message in his couplet,

To preach from Plato and to prove by Seneca
That all things under heaven ought to be in common
(quoted in Lindsay, 85)

These men introduced the Christian egalitarian theology that when added to the effects of Wycliffe's writings played a pivotal role in inciting the revolt. While Wycliffe certainly had his role, he did not start the revolt and in fact he was opposed to it. For a concern for Christ's poor to develop into a call for revolution, the English heresy against the Catholic Church hierarchy in England had to be carried to a radical extreme. John Ball effectively and famously filled this role.

Unlike the other leaders in the revolt, John Ball plays a prominent role throughout the chronicles of the revolt, and much is written about his activities long before, during, and after the revolt. It is vitally important to the religious interpretation of the revolt that Ball was seen by his contemporaries to be the driving force of the revolt. It is also significant that Ball was repeatedly linked with Wycliffe, although their two theologies were patently different. Ball's theology, if it can be called that, was both accessibly simple and instantly popular, a combination which had predictable effects on an already restive peasant class. It can be summed up, of course, by the couplet that he used to open his sermons, which has been included in every account of Ball written since:

Whan Adam dalf, and Evé span,
Wo was thanne a gentilman?
(quoted  in Dobson, 374)

According to the diligent chronicler Froissart, Ball preached to the massed villagers that all men were created equal in the beginning, and that the institution of lordship was one instituted against God's will (Lindsay, 72). Ball did this for long enough to have quite an impact on the peasants of Kent, and Walsingham writes, "For twenty years and more Balle had been preaching continually in different places such things as he knew were pleasing to the people" (qtd. in Dobson, 374). Contemporary historians were quick to link Ball and Wycliffe. Walsingham wrote of Ball, "He taught, moreover, the perverse doctrines of the perfidious John Wycliffe" (qtd. in Dobson, 374). Knighton wrote in 1382 that Ball served as a precursor to Wycliffe just as John the Baptist did to Christ (Dobson, 375). The effect of Ball's preaching was potentially volatile enough to attract the attention of the established church. The Westminster Chronicle records,

In the meantime John Ball, a priest in every respect unworthy of the priestly style,
 was arrested at Coventry and brought to St. Albans.  He had preached up and down the
 towns of England doctrines peculiarly designed to incite the masses into joining the
 conspiracy (quoted.  in Hector, p. 15).

In fact, Ball was excommunicated, showing the extent of how dangerous the church viewed his doctrines in light of his immense popularity.

The extent of Ball's role in the revolt became apparent once the revolt began. Ball was extremely popular with the masses; Walsingham wrote, "Nor did he lack hearers among the common people, whom he always strove to entice to his sermons by pleasing words, and the slander of prelates" (quoted in Dobson, 374). Knighton and the Anonimalle Chronicle both point out that one of the revolting mob's first actions was to free Ball. It was after the commons broke Ball out of prison that he gave his famous sermon at Blackheath, where contemporary writers record that he used his famous couplet (Dobson, 123-137). Ball's religious leadership of the revolt is demonstrated in Knighton's statement that the commons, upon freeing Ball, "Brought him out and made him go with them, for they proposed to promote him as archbishop" (quoted in Dobson, 137). Froissart's chronicle records that Ball was present with the other leaders Tyler and Straw to lead the insurgents in the sacking of the Savoy, the raiding of the Tower, and the events at Smithfield (Dobson, 187-98). Finally, as the revolt was put down, the forces of the crown interrogated and executed Ball, so that the so-called confession of John Ball and his death mark a conclusion of the revolt. Toward the end of the Westminster Chronicle's account of the rising, it says of Ball,

He was accordingly put on trial before a judge; and as he did not deny having preached
 matter calculated to stir up the populace he was condemned to death, being hanged and drawn
 and afterwards quartered.  His head was stuck up over Ludgate (Hector, p. 15).

Ball's prominence, albeit often as a symbol of the faith of the commons, is seen before, during, and after the revolt. And since his contemporaries were so quick to link him to Wycliffe, we see both of their influences throughout the events of May and June of 1381.

No matter what influence Wycliffe and Ball had in providing broad and idealistic theological inspiration for the revolt, the fact remains that direct causes of the rising were social and economic forces. However, while modern society may separate economic and societal hardship from religion, the people of the fourteenth century did not. New and radical theological notions were able to inspire and facilitate revolt because they tied in with the situation that the peasants were living in. The rural and urban poor had been ravaged by plague, stifled by the Statute of Labourers, hurt by constant warfare, taxed into poverty, and incensed by having to pay a tithe to a Papacy that only escaped the "Babylonian Captivity" four years before the revolt (Hilton). That the peasants desired a moral society ministered to by a true church was evinced by the popularity of Ball's Blackheath sermon. "Piers Plowman," the honest and good peasant, became a symbol of the revolt, as shown in letters between the leaders (Dobson, 380-383). Instead, they were faced with three consecutive and oppressive poll taxes, enforced by men whose actions were characterized by one of their number, who Knighton writes, "Horrible to relate, shamelessly lifted the young girls . . . In this way he compelled the friends and parents of the girls to pay the tax for them" (quoted in Dobson, 135). Such actions by royal officials, added on top of oppressive taxes and an unconcerned and powerful church establishment, were bound to cause moral indignation and revolt among a people who had recently been told that Christ had been poor like them and that they were all equally sons of Adam and Eve.

The insurgents, who for the sake of convenience will be referred to here as the peasants, demonstrated their religious sentiments and inspiration by their actions in the revolt. Regardless of what the contemporary chroniclers wrote, they had no intention to tear down the institution of the church. A memorable scene from the outbreak of the revolt as recorded in the Anonimalle Chronicle has four thousand rebels entering Canterbury cathedral during mass. After they knelt, the peasants demanded the monks there to elect a new archbishop from among themselves, because they planned to behead Sudbury "for his iniquity" (Dobson, 127). The peasants' actions in Canterbury cathedral on the tenth of June are significant to a religious interpretation of the revolt. Their first act was to kneel, showing that they had reverence for God, Whose house they were entering, and had reverence for the church and its customs. The peasants' demand for the monks to choose an archbishop demonstrates a submission to the authority of the church, as long as the church remained true to their standards of Christianity. Nowhere would the actions of the peasants suggest a desire to tear down or destroy the church. The peasants did desire to punish an archbishop who represented royal power and who was behind many of their grievances. They did not simply wish to eliminate an archbishop; they wanted to replace an iniquitous one with a monk. Once the commons freed Ball, their desire was to make him archbishop (Knighton, 137). These events show that a goal of the peasants in the revolt was to carry out a purification of the church in England by purging it of the powerful and greedy and placing those churchmen of lower orders whom they trusted in roles of church leadership.

Finally, the religious goals and inspirations of revolt, to purify the church and establish a moral society that did not oppress the peasants and laborers, are evident in the climax of the revolt, the events in London from the thirteenth to the fifteenth of June. Of course, the revolt in London had more than its share of murder, looting, and general insurrectionary mayhem. However, in two of the rebels' most significant public acts, the murder or execution of Sudbury (depending on point of view) and the burning of the Savoy, the rebels effectively promoted their religious agendas for all to see. Sudbury's death had been planned since the beginning of the revolt, and those rebels who called for his beheading showed no reluctance to carry out their purge of the higher ecclesiastical establishment. The peasants' acting in the destruction of the Savoy, the palace of the hated John of Gaunt, were again able to demonstrate their cause of fighting robbery and iniquity in a campaign for moral, Christian justice. They effectively chose a public act to make a symbolic statement about their religiously inspired goals (Justice, 92). The chroniclers of the revolt all agree that the peasants did not raid the Savoy to loot it. The Anominalle Chronicle records that the peasants accidentally rolled three barrels of gunpowder into the blaze, thinking that the barrels contained gold and silver. The writer who recorded this interpreted the peasants' actions at the Savoy to be directed purely from hatred of Gaunt (Dobson, 157). However, Knighton's account adds a new and significant dimension to a religious interpretation of the revolt in this event. He writes that the peasants threw one of their number who disobeyed the injunction not to steal from the Savoy into the flames, "Saying that they were lovers of truth and justice, not robbers and thieves" (quoted in Dobson, 184). Ball had preached, "If God had willed that there should be serfs He would have said at the beginning of the world who should be serf and who should be lord" (quoted in Lindsay, 72). Here in the events in London are the results of the popular doctrine of Ball and others of an honest peasantry, beloved of Christ, rising against those who were powerful and rich at their expense against God's will.

Care must be taken not to neglect the side against the revolt when examining the religious causes and inspirations of the Peasants' Revolt. Just as the peasants, laborers, and poorer townspeople would never think of separating the social and economic aspects of their lives from the religious, the crown, nobility, and obviously the church at least had to take faith into consideration in the governing of the realm. Just as the peasants felt that they were rising in support of Christian morality, the suppressers of the revolt saw themselves on a crusade, where with Divine assistance they defended the church and Christian order in the kingdom. Knighton describes the peasants as "Neither fearing God nor revering the honour of mother church" (qtd. in Dobson, 185). All the chroniclers refer to Divine assistance in putting down the revolt, but the religious sentiments of the church and government are made most obvious in the account of Sudbury's death in Walsingham's history. Sudbury is presented going to his death as a Christian martyr in the tradition of Becket, protesting his innocence and forgiving his executioners. Walsingham even attributes two specific miracles to Sudbury after his death, and says that those who killed him were visited by God's vengeance (Dobson, 173-75). Such religious inspiration spurred on the recovery of power, which was taken up by not only lords but also those church officials who held lands in areas that had been in revolt. Finally, as has been mentioned before, the Christian egalitarianism of the revolt was quick to be linked to Wycliffe, and the church was eager to use the suppression of the revolt to attack the heresy that had helped to inspire it.

Popular uprisings had occurred in medieval England before and after the revolt of 1381. However, none of the others had the combination of strong religious, economic, and social forces that produced such a far-reaching insurrection. Economic and social hardships had plagued the commons of England since the beginning of the Hundred Years war and the Black Death. However, medieval people were a religious people, who believed that their actions would affect them and their loved ones in the hereafter, and a major revolt could not take place until oppressive taxes were joined by new and radical religious doctrines. Wycliffe, to some extent taken out of context, provided a well-reasoned theological argument against the agents and officials of the established church. Ball's ideas of Christian equality built on this and aided in the creation of a revolutionary force whose own respect for Christianity developed a desire to purify the church. Of course, it would be erroneous to argue that the Peasants' revolt came out of an age of faith, and then ignore the effects of religion on the side of the government, lords, and church. Any desire to put down the revolt, for whatever reason, was backed by a belief that the insurgents were inspired by the devil and bent on tearing down the church, the crown, and the law and order that defended Christianity. The events of 1381 cannot be viewed separate from religion, since it was religion that inspired and supported both sides of the revolt, and especially since a recurring theme of the history of the revolt is one of conflict between old and new understandings of Christianity.

Back to Cover