Rebellion In Late Medieval Europe
``Assess the significance of the role of individuals in the development of reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. The rebellion in Late Medieval Europe was caused by numerous individuals, events and developments in the 14th Century. In this essay I will be discussing the significance of each of these factors concerning the English, Czech and German revolts, and the opinions of Cohn, Tuchman and Walsingham. The historian Barbara Tuchman commented that 'Seen through the telescope of history, John Wycliffe was the most significant Englishman of all time. ' Her argument is supported by the cemented fact that Wycliffe had an immense influence over future generations; concerning his views on the church, the corrupt monarchy
…show more content…
and that 'the bible is the final authority to which men 's consciences must give an accounting '. His resounding influence on the rebellion was shown through the strong links between the English and Bohemian revolts, caused by Jan Hus ' conformity to Wycliffe 's philosophies. For instance, Hus translated Wycliffe 's teachings into Czech and spent over five years preaching and circulating his ideas through Bohemia. Wycliffe 's ideas were received enthusiastically in Prague, just as they had done in England, and it now seemed that Wycliffe, along with Bohemian Jan Hus, understood the prospective power of the bible to change lives and shake nations. Tuchman highlights the link between Wycliffe and Hus to be 'dramatically increased by their shared belief in the supremacy of the bible over the church. ' Moreover, she is supported by the fact that both gained such widespread support across the two countries; 'Both Wycliffe and Hus galvanized the people of their respective countries due to their stand against the corruption, indulgences and immortality of the church. ' Wycliffe was the first man to challenge the teachings of the church. He condemned its abuses of the ordinary people and had a significant role in the development of reformation and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. His influence had an overwhelming effect on the Bohemian protests and the actions of those in English Parliament. John of Gaunt, for example, acted as Wycliffe 's political protector whilst he was attacking the church. Gaunt was no longer satisfied with how parliament was treated as an inferior by the church and hoped to gain public favour by propagating Wycliffe 's ideas. Having a powerful member of parliament supporting Wycliffe and his teachings was stated by William Langland, author of Piers Plowman, a satirical alliterative poem of the period, to have greatly influenced the magnitude of Wycliffe 's power by 'spreading and scattering such controversial yet righteous ideas abroad, simplified into propagandist slogans. ' Tuchman reiterates that ‘his widespread influence in England was reinforced by the impact of the Lollards, who spread his ideas, and his position with regard to the temporal rule of the clergy.’ The fact that Wycliffe 's ideas and teachings were so well received in Bohemia, and that he had such a lasting effect on the people of England, clearly shows that, as an individual, he had a major influence on reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. John Ball was a priest of St James ' Church in Colchester. He was another influential figurehead responsible for galvanizing and educating the peasants originally. He encouraged them in a speech made in York in 1377 to 'Stand together in God 's name and defend our right to be free from enslavement by our so-called masters. ' Ball strongly believed it was wrong that some people in England were very rich while others were very poor. Ball was recognized first by criticizing the feudal system and was imprisoned regularly for his controversial sermons, denouncing the power of the Roman Catholic Church. In 'The Pursuit of the Millennium ', Norman Cohn refers to Ball as 'the crazy priest from Kent. ' Ball told the peasants that the nobility should not have great power over the common people. Cohn criticizes Ball 's actions as being 'too extreme and negative for the church to positively respond to. ' Cohn points towards the fact that Ball had minimal impact on the rebellion due to the ‘extensive periods of his imprisonment’ linking to Engels’ view that ‘Ball only preached in the South and East, neglecting the North and West where revolts were also prominent.’ This is important to note when weighing up his impact on the rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. For instance, it seems his methods were based around attacking the church instead of concentrating on the needs of the common people. John Walsingham challenges Cohn 's view on the impact of Ball. He comments on the importance of Ball 's radical views in 'The Egalitarian Millennium. ' He writes that 'Ball wanted all men to enjoy equal freedom, rank and power. ' Despite his dubious methods, Walsingham continues to report on Ball 's positive significance on peasants and the 1381 rebellion. 'It seemed clear however that after Ball 's sermons, the peasants saw no reason why they should render heavy dues and services to a lord who was no longer their protector. ' Moreover, Walsingham depicts a view of the revolt that paints Wycliffe as a Philosopher and Ball an activist, merely putting Wycliffe 's theories into practice. Therefore it seemed that Walsingham is correct in affirming that Ball had an influence on the rebellion and protest in Late Medieval Europe after all. Wat Tyler was the leader of the 1381 Peasant uprising, which was named after him (Wat Tyler 's Rebellion). In 1381 Wat Tyler led more than 100 000 peasants in a march to London after the overtaxed people lost patience when the King ordered the introduction of a new poll tax. The rebels demanded an end to serfdom and a repeal of oppressive labour laws. A young king Richard II agreed to their demands but Wat Tyler was soon killed by the mayor of London and the king 's promises put aside. Although his leadership was questionable, there is no doubt that Tyler had been successful where many others had not.
He had, with the help of Wycliffe and John Ball, galvanized thousands of peasants to rise up against the authorities that constricted them to their land unjustly, and temporarily reduced the king into giving concessions. In history, the impact of Tyler was said by Norman Cohn to be 'underestimated. ' He states that 'Tyler 's ability to solely begin an organised uprising is outstanding. ' This is clearly substantial evidence that he was a key individual in the rebellion of Late Medieval Europe. His support dramatically increased as he entered London, despite the fact that he lost discipline of the mob. His demands for an abolition of serfdom, tithes and poll tax were said by Cohn to be 'exceedingly crucial in gaining the support of the workers of London, and thus transferring power from the church and parliament to the people. ' His ideas were supported by Ball 's use of religion to urge equality in society, a view similar to modern day communism. Although Tyler was successful in causing the uprising in the first place, Cohn is wrong in describing him as crucial and influential due to his failure at retaining control of the mob and being tricked by Richard II, which led to his death. Ultimately this caused minimal change to how England was run, as nearly all of the promises made by the king to the mob were overturned. This points towards the fact that Tyler …show more content…
had little impact in reforming the powers of the King, even if he had a huge effect on rebellion and protest in Late Medieval England. Jan Hus is another key individual who must be identified in having an impact on rebellion, protest and reformation in Late Medieval Europe. The 1419 – 1452 Hussite Wars, for instance, were a prime example of his prominence and popularity in the Czech region. The Hussite revolt was a revolt by the people who supported Jan Hus ' views. They wanted reform of the church, influenced by Wycliffe 's ideas, which the Catholic Church saw as a direct threat to their power. The lasting impact of Hus became apparent when, after the Battle of Sudomer, the Hussites became two factions: the Utraquists, who derived from Hus ' doctrine that accepts the obligation that the faithful can receive Holy Communion and the Taborites, the extreme group controlled by Jan Zizka who rejected all ceremonies of the Catholic Church. Cohn comments that the Taborites had the greatest influence in Bohemia due to ‘their real goal of total abolition of the feudal system and the establishment of a classless society without private property.’ Cohn states that ‘their adherence to bringing down the authorities was only matched by their prominent and radical methods in doing so.’ Hus, influenced by Wycliffe, believed the church 's authorities were too powerful and the secular powers needed to move against it. Thomas Walsingham outlines the differences between the Bohemian and English revolts, 'It is important to note that the Bohemians ' secular rulers took the call for attacking the powers of the church on board. ' I concur with Walsingham’s view due to the church being supported by German leaders who had no intention of relinquishing their control over Bohemia. The Great Schism that existed between the two rival popes led to Hus ' demise as an influential figure in Bohemia. For example, when the third Pope John XIII, King of Central Italy, wanted to go to war with his rival in Naples he raised money by selling indulgences from the church. Hus then took it a step too far by launching a nationwide protest against this. He was therefore excommunicated by the Pope and lost the respect and political protection of King Wenceslas. Although his death sparked a huge revolt that greatly troubled the Bohemian authorities, Walsingham rightly comments that 'his attempts to do too much in such a short space of time, was the main reason for Hus ' deterioration as a figurehead of the Bohemian revolution. ' Jan Zizka was born in Troznow in 1360 to a minor noble family.
Zizka’s name first became prominent during the Hussite Wars. Zizka led The Hussite movement that followed the teachings of Czech priest, philosopher and reformer Jan Hus. His reputation grew rapidly after the success of the ‘Wagenburg Tactics’ in the Hussite Crusades. Norman Cohn describes that Zizka ‘helped develop tactics of using tabors as mobile fortifications. When the Hussite army faced a numerically superior opponent they prepared carts for the battle by forming them into squares or circles.’ His return to Bohemia coincided with the religious upheaval following the death of Jan
Hus. He took a key role in the organizing of armed resistance against forces loyal to the Emperor Sigismund, in the storming of Prague’s town hall in 1419 after the death of King Wenceslas. Zizka again used his innovative wagon tactics that served the Hussite cause well over the following years, to rise to prominence in Bohemia and use his extensive military prowess to ensure his individual influence on rebellion and protest in Late Medieval Europe.
In 1423 Zizka split from the Taborites creating the more moderate Orebite faction which he led until his death at the siege of Prysbislav, in 1424. At his death Jan Zizka had fought 16 major battles, innumerable conflicts and sieges, including the Polish and Bohemian affairs that had a lasting impact on the ecclesiastical organization of Tabor and how strict military discipline was instituted for years to come.
Zizka is a national hero in Bohemia and his 'combined arms ' tactics are increasingly being seen as the fore runner to Polish and Swedish tactics of the following century; as well as contributing to the accomplishment of altering the way in which Bohemia was controlled by the government and royalty. The historian Friedrich Engels commented on Zizka’s legacy ‘After his death, his movement remained, however – the Hussites fought and defeated five papal crusades between 1420 and 1431, eventually made peace with the Pope, and installed a Hussite King of Bohemia.’ Thus, supporting Cohn’s view that Zizka was ‘the most prominent and influential leader, military or not, in Late Medieval Europe.’ Elsewhere in Europe, many outbreaks in Germany of the Bundshech Leagues made it apparent that rebellion and protest had spread from England throughout Europe. Although these were crushed by force quickly, it was Martin Luther 's defiance of church authorities that gave people courage, and encouraged Thomas Munstzer to lead a social revolution. The ruling classes of Europe found unwitting allies in the heretical who sought the return of the Golden Age. Followers of leaders such as Thomas Munstzer saw the return of an egalitarian society coming to power by completely transforming society and the economy. However, Luther and Müntzer disagreed theologically on several doctrines. Müntzer believed and taught of the "living word of God" and the banning of infant baptism. Such a view was considered extreme by reformers such as Martin Luther, and therefore oppressive actions were taken to disband such groups and gave the ruling class a reason to enforce the status quo of a social revolution. This suggests that the German Revolution’s impact was greatly hindered by the stark ideological differences between the two influential leaders. 'The association between the state rulers and Lutheranism was therefore a natural alliance of political and religious dissent. ' A theory adopted by Thomas Walsingham, who perceived Martin Luther 's 95 theses, beliefs in a social revolution to have greatly increased the impact of the German revolution. The historian Elton, however, challenges this view by stating that ‘the printing press was a vital tool in spreading Luther 's ideas of a revolution across Germany and, later, Europe.’ Luther was definitely more influential due to the advancement of the printing press; he was able to translate the bible, giving Germans a voice, identity and accessibility to interpret the bible. Thomas Müntzer was a controversial figure in life and in death and is regarded as a significant force in the religious and social history of modern Europe. Marxists in the 20th century viewed him as a leader in an early bourgeois revolution against feudalism and the struggle for a classless society. Although he began his religious revolt by following Luther’s theological doctrines, Müntzer soon went his own way. Believing that teachings came from the Holy Spirit, he placed them in opposition to the Lutheran doctrines of justification. Cohn’s evaluation of his impact is correct in stating that ‘The revolutionary aspect of his theology lay in the link he made between his concept of the inevitable conquest of government and the thesis that the common people themselves were the instruments of God.’ In 'Aspects of European History 1491 – 1789 ' by Stephen J. Lee, Luther 's success in making his religious beliefs a permanent impression was attributed to three factors. First, it was the muted reaction of the Pope and Emperor Maximilian to Luther 's outbursts between the years 1517 – 1519. A belief echoed by Norman Cohn as to be caused by 'their preoccupation with German issues and the problem of imperial succession. ' The second reason was the adoption of Lutheranism as an official state religion, pointing towards the fact that Luther had a significant influence on the German people. Cohn describes the motive as being 'strongly secular ' especially since a number of State Princes and Free Cities adopted Luther 's methods, as well as the lower classes. The third was the inability of the forces of orthodoxy to crush Lutheranism and its political protectors. Taking this into account, it seems that the influences of both the English and German revolts were increased by the assistance of powerful political figures. John Wycliffe, for instance, was protected by the political influence of John of Gaunt; whilst Martin Luther had the support of King Wenceslas. In essence both Luther and Wycliffe were given time to promote and promulgate their ideas so they could seep into the public consciousness. These factors all contributed to Martin Luther having an enduring impact on rebellion, protest and reformation in Late Medieval Europe. Although the impact of certain individuals had a resounding effect on protest, rebellion and reformation in Late Medieval Europe, it is important to note other factors that may have contributed as well. The Black Death was a devastating pandemic that ravaged Europe for several hundred years, wiping out over 1/3 of its population. The effects of the plague however, were vital in shaping many aspects of European society. The plague saw the end of the feudal system and the rise of power for many lower class citizens. It also changed the relationship that many European citizens had with the Church. It was a key feature in many literary and art works of the time and encouraged the people of Europe to have a new found respect for death and God (but not necessarily the Church). All of these elements together forced Europe to become stronger and more advanced both socially and economically. Barbara Tuchman, however, puts forward the view that the Black Death resulted in 'a weakened acceptance of the system, a mistrust of government and an awakening sense that authority could be challenged. ' Moreover, the Plague of 1348 gave Peasants a newfound feeling of status. Tuchman’s view concerning the importance of the Black Death is supported by the fact that the peasants believed they had been spared by God, and therefore had the right to roam the land looking for better wages and living conditions. To curb peasants wandering around the countryside looking for better pay, the government introduced the Statute of Labourers in 1351 that stated: 'No peasants could be paid more than the wages paid in 1346. No lord or master should offer more wages than paid in 1346. No peasants could leave the village they belonged to. ' Though some peasants decided to ignore the statute, many knew that disobedience would lead to serious punishment. This created great anger amongst the peasants which was to boil over in 1381 with the Peasants Revolt. Hence, it can be argued that the Black Death was to lead to the Peasants Revolt. This was a significant turning point of the reformation of England, as Tuchman rightly states 'If all men are derived from Adam and Eve, surely no-one should be held in hereditary servitude. It is possible that inequalities on earth are contrary to the will of God. ' Tuchman echoes the common opinion of the Middle Ages concerning the demand for a drastic change in the Feudal System. I concur with Tuchman on the fact that the Black Death had a significant impact on reformation and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. Without it, the peasants would still be tied to their land, there would be no challenge to the feudal system and the peasants would feel no obligation to challenge their lords that binded them; sparked by the knowledge that 'change was in fact possible and moral authority can be no stronger than its acknowledgment. ' The Church in the Middle Ages was, in many ways, the backbone of English society. Its influence covered many spheres: spiritual, judicial, financial and temporal. The Crown and Parliament frequently challenged the Church 's authority by law. The Statute of Provisions in 1351, for example, gave the King the responsibility of protecting the English Church against Papal provisions; thus increasing its sphere of influence and authority across Europe. Tuchman writes that 'Europe in the late 14th Century was 'highly unstable ', and countries such as France and Italy brought upon themselves 'the most fearful challenge of the century. ' I agree with Tuchman 's opinion that 'the corruption in Spain was an invitation to trouble ' as the English Parliament only brought in two-thirds of their expected sum through taxes from Spain in 1380. The corruption lay with the tax commissioners who were widely known for being easily bribed to overlook families or falsify numbers. 'The lords and royal uncles had not paid attention to the constant complaints of rural insubordination ' and was importantly followed by the third rise in poll tax in 20 years, a significant factor in causing anger, and therefore demands for an uprising against those who controlled them. The problem and corruption in the Church was no less visible in Bohemia. Peasants in the Czech region were increasingly bound to serfdom, whilst the nobles expanded their power by manipulating the law. The impact on rebellion and the peasants demand for reformation was caused by: the Church 's interference in people 's lives, the heavy taxation and the refusal of the clergy (a majority of whom were German) to co-operate with the Czech congregation. This evident racial tension is outlined by Walsingham as 'the definitive cause for the Bohemian revolt ' as well as the main difference between the English and Bohemian revolts; England, for instance, was dominated by a class enmity and differing socio-economic ideas. Walsingham 's view on Millenarianism being a significant factor in causing unrest and protest in Bohemia is supported by the peasant 's strong adherence to the view that the Day of Judgement was imminent and therefore only dramatic change will change the world and reform will be brought about. Walsingham believes that the Hussites took on these ideas because 'they claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong. They therefore believe they will be destroyed soon by a powerful force i.e. God. ' Engels supports this view ‘The Hussites felt the utmost contempt towards the corrupt government and royalty that abused its power by mistreating the people of Bohemia.’ The links between the English and Bohemian revolts can be observed by their respective influential leaders, Wycliffe and Jan Hus, both attacking the wealth and temporal power of the Roman Catholic Church. Wycliffe, for instance, is described by Cohn as 'defending the rights of princes to appoint bishops, tax the church and confiscate church lands. ' Whilst Hus called for the reformation of the church 's wealth, power and what it taught. The wrath of the Church was provoked further by the demands of Hus and Wycliffe to increase religious fundamentalism, nationalism and translating the gospels. The impact of Llollardy and the Crown diminished the secular powers of the church in the 14th Century. The imposed restrictions on the Church 's temporal arm led to the significance of the Church on reformation and rebellion to be decreased to a certain extent; but the fact remains that the reformation has a multitude of possible starting points. Reaction against the worldliness and corruption of the church is a recurrent theme in reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. No one individual or event can be said to be the single catalyst for reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. However, a group of individuals managed to tap into the growing feelings of resentment and dissatisfaction with the inequality of wealth and power most visibly demonstrated in all walks of life to all people by the Church of Rome. With its control over the spiritual and temporal lives of people in Europe, its failings were increasingly obvious. When plague took hold, it caused many to question the validity of the church 's authority. The Rochester Monk, William Dene, observed that 'priests betook themselves to where they could get larger stipends than in their own benefices, on which account many benefices remained unserved. ' and that 'Labourers and unskilled workmen were imbued with such a spirit of rebellion. ' This view is supported by Tuchman who comments that ‘the Plague to those with the opportunity and ability to seize it, presented a golden opportunity for advancement.’ Walsingham further links the revolt to the Black Death, ‘Kent rose up under the leadership of Wat Tyler and marched on London in 1381, the outcome of simmering resentments and sharp social shifts caused in part by the Black Death.’ I believe that Wycliffe 's articulate criticism of the church gave voice to those who wanted reform, wanted to express protest and, although a conservative himself, encouraged rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. Bibliography/Webliography • Arthur Bryant/ 'The Age of Chivalry ' (1963)
• Norman Cohn/ 'The Pursuit of the Millennium ' (1957)
• Rodney Hilton/ 'Medieval Peasant Movements and the English Rising of 1381 ' (1973)
• Julie Jones/ 'The Medieval World ' (1979)
• Henry Knighton/ 'Effects of the Black Death ' (1980)
• William Langland/ 'The Vision of Piers Plowman ' (1984)
• Stephen J.Lee/ 'Aspects of European History 1494-1789 ' (1978)
• Barbara Tuchman/ 'A Distant Mirror ' (1978)
• Thomas Walsingham/ 'Peasant Rebels of London 1381 ' (1997)
• www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/YALDdeathtyler.htm - Wat Tyler and the Peasants Revolt
• www.spartacus.net.co.uk/YALDballJ2.htm - John Ball
and that 'the bible is the final authority to which men 's consciences must give an accounting '. His resounding influence on the rebellion was shown through the strong links between the English and Bohemian revolts, caused by Jan Hus ' conformity to Wycliffe 's philosophies. For instance, Hus translated Wycliffe 's teachings into Czech and spent over five years preaching and circulating his ideas through Bohemia. Wycliffe 's ideas were received enthusiastically in Prague, just as they had done in England, and it now seemed that Wycliffe, along with Bohemian Jan Hus, understood the prospective power of the bible to change lives and shake nations. Tuchman highlights the link between Wycliffe and Hus to be 'dramatically increased by their shared belief in the supremacy of the bible over the church. ' Moreover, she is supported by the fact that both gained such widespread support across the two countries; 'Both Wycliffe and Hus galvanized the people of their respective countries due to their stand against the corruption, indulgences and immortality of the church. ' Wycliffe was the first man to challenge the teachings of the church. He condemned its abuses of the ordinary people and had a significant role in the development of reformation and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. His influence had an overwhelming effect on the Bohemian protests and the actions of those in English Parliament. John of Gaunt, for example, acted as Wycliffe 's political protector whilst he was attacking the church. Gaunt was no longer satisfied with how parliament was treated as an inferior by the church and hoped to gain public favour by propagating Wycliffe 's ideas. Having a powerful member of parliament supporting Wycliffe and his teachings was stated by William Langland, author of Piers Plowman, a satirical alliterative poem of the period, to have greatly influenced the magnitude of Wycliffe 's power by 'spreading and scattering such controversial yet righteous ideas abroad, simplified into propagandist slogans. ' Tuchman reiterates that ‘his widespread influence in England was reinforced by the impact of the Lollards, who spread his ideas, and his position with regard to the temporal rule of the clergy.’ The fact that Wycliffe 's ideas and teachings were so well received in Bohemia, and that he had such a lasting effect on the people of England, clearly shows that, as an individual, he had a major influence on reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. John Ball was a priest of St James ' Church in Colchester. He was another influential figurehead responsible for galvanizing and educating the peasants originally. He encouraged them in a speech made in York in 1377 to 'Stand together in God 's name and defend our right to be free from enslavement by our so-called masters. ' Ball strongly believed it was wrong that some people in England were very rich while others were very poor. Ball was recognized first by criticizing the feudal system and was imprisoned regularly for his controversial sermons, denouncing the power of the Roman Catholic Church. In 'The Pursuit of the Millennium ', Norman Cohn refers to Ball as 'the crazy priest from Kent. ' Ball told the peasants that the nobility should not have great power over the common people. Cohn criticizes Ball 's actions as being 'too extreme and negative for the church to positively respond to. ' Cohn points towards the fact that Ball had minimal impact on the rebellion due to the ‘extensive periods of his imprisonment’ linking to Engels’ view that ‘Ball only preached in the South and East, neglecting the North and West where revolts were also prominent.’ This is important to note when weighing up his impact on the rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. For instance, it seems his methods were based around attacking the church instead of concentrating on the needs of the common people. John Walsingham challenges Cohn 's view on the impact of Ball. He comments on the importance of Ball 's radical views in 'The Egalitarian Millennium. ' He writes that 'Ball wanted all men to enjoy equal freedom, rank and power. ' Despite his dubious methods, Walsingham continues to report on Ball 's positive significance on peasants and the 1381 rebellion. 'It seemed clear however that after Ball 's sermons, the peasants saw no reason why they should render heavy dues and services to a lord who was no longer their protector. ' Moreover, Walsingham depicts a view of the revolt that paints Wycliffe as a Philosopher and Ball an activist, merely putting Wycliffe 's theories into practice. Therefore it seemed that Walsingham is correct in affirming that Ball had an influence on the rebellion and protest in Late Medieval Europe after all. Wat Tyler was the leader of the 1381 Peasant uprising, which was named after him (Wat Tyler 's Rebellion). In 1381 Wat Tyler led more than 100 000 peasants in a march to London after the overtaxed people lost patience when the King ordered the introduction of a new poll tax. The rebels demanded an end to serfdom and a repeal of oppressive labour laws. A young king Richard II agreed to their demands but Wat Tyler was soon killed by the mayor of London and the king 's promises put aside. Although his leadership was questionable, there is no doubt that Tyler had been successful where many others had not.
He had, with the help of Wycliffe and John Ball, galvanized thousands of peasants to rise up against the authorities that constricted them to their land unjustly, and temporarily reduced the king into giving concessions. In history, the impact of Tyler was said by Norman Cohn to be 'underestimated. ' He states that 'Tyler 's ability to solely begin an organised uprising is outstanding. ' This is clearly substantial evidence that he was a key individual in the rebellion of Late Medieval Europe. His support dramatically increased as he entered London, despite the fact that he lost discipline of the mob. His demands for an abolition of serfdom, tithes and poll tax were said by Cohn to be 'exceedingly crucial in gaining the support of the workers of London, and thus transferring power from the church and parliament to the people. ' His ideas were supported by Ball 's use of religion to urge equality in society, a view similar to modern day communism. Although Tyler was successful in causing the uprising in the first place, Cohn is wrong in describing him as crucial and influential due to his failure at retaining control of the mob and being tricked by Richard II, which led to his death. Ultimately this caused minimal change to how England was run, as nearly all of the promises made by the king to the mob were overturned. This points towards the fact that Tyler …show more content…
had little impact in reforming the powers of the King, even if he had a huge effect on rebellion and protest in Late Medieval England. Jan Hus is another key individual who must be identified in having an impact on rebellion, protest and reformation in Late Medieval Europe. The 1419 – 1452 Hussite Wars, for instance, were a prime example of his prominence and popularity in the Czech region. The Hussite revolt was a revolt by the people who supported Jan Hus ' views. They wanted reform of the church, influenced by Wycliffe 's ideas, which the Catholic Church saw as a direct threat to their power. The lasting impact of Hus became apparent when, after the Battle of Sudomer, the Hussites became two factions: the Utraquists, who derived from Hus ' doctrine that accepts the obligation that the faithful can receive Holy Communion and the Taborites, the extreme group controlled by Jan Zizka who rejected all ceremonies of the Catholic Church. Cohn comments that the Taborites had the greatest influence in Bohemia due to ‘their real goal of total abolition of the feudal system and the establishment of a classless society without private property.’ Cohn states that ‘their adherence to bringing down the authorities was only matched by their prominent and radical methods in doing so.’ Hus, influenced by Wycliffe, believed the church 's authorities were too powerful and the secular powers needed to move against it. Thomas Walsingham outlines the differences between the Bohemian and English revolts, 'It is important to note that the Bohemians ' secular rulers took the call for attacking the powers of the church on board. ' I concur with Walsingham’s view due to the church being supported by German leaders who had no intention of relinquishing their control over Bohemia. The Great Schism that existed between the two rival popes led to Hus ' demise as an influential figure in Bohemia. For example, when the third Pope John XIII, King of Central Italy, wanted to go to war with his rival in Naples he raised money by selling indulgences from the church. Hus then took it a step too far by launching a nationwide protest against this. He was therefore excommunicated by the Pope and lost the respect and political protection of King Wenceslas. Although his death sparked a huge revolt that greatly troubled the Bohemian authorities, Walsingham rightly comments that 'his attempts to do too much in such a short space of time, was the main reason for Hus ' deterioration as a figurehead of the Bohemian revolution. ' Jan Zizka was born in Troznow in 1360 to a minor noble family.
Zizka’s name first became prominent during the Hussite Wars. Zizka led The Hussite movement that followed the teachings of Czech priest, philosopher and reformer Jan Hus. His reputation grew rapidly after the success of the ‘Wagenburg Tactics’ in the Hussite Crusades. Norman Cohn describes that Zizka ‘helped develop tactics of using tabors as mobile fortifications. When the Hussite army faced a numerically superior opponent they prepared carts for the battle by forming them into squares or circles.’ His return to Bohemia coincided with the religious upheaval following the death of Jan
Hus. He took a key role in the organizing of armed resistance against forces loyal to the Emperor Sigismund, in the storming of Prague’s town hall in 1419 after the death of King Wenceslas. Zizka again used his innovative wagon tactics that served the Hussite cause well over the following years, to rise to prominence in Bohemia and use his extensive military prowess to ensure his individual influence on rebellion and protest in Late Medieval Europe.
In 1423 Zizka split from the Taborites creating the more moderate Orebite faction which he led until his death at the siege of Prysbislav, in 1424. At his death Jan Zizka had fought 16 major battles, innumerable conflicts and sieges, including the Polish and Bohemian affairs that had a lasting impact on the ecclesiastical organization of Tabor and how strict military discipline was instituted for years to come.
Zizka is a national hero in Bohemia and his 'combined arms ' tactics are increasingly being seen as the fore runner to Polish and Swedish tactics of the following century; as well as contributing to the accomplishment of altering the way in which Bohemia was controlled by the government and royalty. The historian Friedrich Engels commented on Zizka’s legacy ‘After his death, his movement remained, however – the Hussites fought and defeated five papal crusades between 1420 and 1431, eventually made peace with the Pope, and installed a Hussite King of Bohemia.’ Thus, supporting Cohn’s view that Zizka was ‘the most prominent and influential leader, military or not, in Late Medieval Europe.’ Elsewhere in Europe, many outbreaks in Germany of the Bundshech Leagues made it apparent that rebellion and protest had spread from England throughout Europe. Although these were crushed by force quickly, it was Martin Luther 's defiance of church authorities that gave people courage, and encouraged Thomas Munstzer to lead a social revolution. The ruling classes of Europe found unwitting allies in the heretical who sought the return of the Golden Age. Followers of leaders such as Thomas Munstzer saw the return of an egalitarian society coming to power by completely transforming society and the economy. However, Luther and Müntzer disagreed theologically on several doctrines. Müntzer believed and taught of the "living word of God" and the banning of infant baptism. Such a view was considered extreme by reformers such as Martin Luther, and therefore oppressive actions were taken to disband such groups and gave the ruling class a reason to enforce the status quo of a social revolution. This suggests that the German Revolution’s impact was greatly hindered by the stark ideological differences between the two influential leaders. 'The association between the state rulers and Lutheranism was therefore a natural alliance of political and religious dissent. ' A theory adopted by Thomas Walsingham, who perceived Martin Luther 's 95 theses, beliefs in a social revolution to have greatly increased the impact of the German revolution. The historian Elton, however, challenges this view by stating that ‘the printing press was a vital tool in spreading Luther 's ideas of a revolution across Germany and, later, Europe.’ Luther was definitely more influential due to the advancement of the printing press; he was able to translate the bible, giving Germans a voice, identity and accessibility to interpret the bible. Thomas Müntzer was a controversial figure in life and in death and is regarded as a significant force in the religious and social history of modern Europe. Marxists in the 20th century viewed him as a leader in an early bourgeois revolution against feudalism and the struggle for a classless society. Although he began his religious revolt by following Luther’s theological doctrines, Müntzer soon went his own way. Believing that teachings came from the Holy Spirit, he placed them in opposition to the Lutheran doctrines of justification. Cohn’s evaluation of his impact is correct in stating that ‘The revolutionary aspect of his theology lay in the link he made between his concept of the inevitable conquest of government and the thesis that the common people themselves were the instruments of God.’ In 'Aspects of European History 1491 – 1789 ' by Stephen J. Lee, Luther 's success in making his religious beliefs a permanent impression was attributed to three factors. First, it was the muted reaction of the Pope and Emperor Maximilian to Luther 's outbursts between the years 1517 – 1519. A belief echoed by Norman Cohn as to be caused by 'their preoccupation with German issues and the problem of imperial succession. ' The second reason was the adoption of Lutheranism as an official state religion, pointing towards the fact that Luther had a significant influence on the German people. Cohn describes the motive as being 'strongly secular ' especially since a number of State Princes and Free Cities adopted Luther 's methods, as well as the lower classes. The third was the inability of the forces of orthodoxy to crush Lutheranism and its political protectors. Taking this into account, it seems that the influences of both the English and German revolts were increased by the assistance of powerful political figures. John Wycliffe, for instance, was protected by the political influence of John of Gaunt; whilst Martin Luther had the support of King Wenceslas. In essence both Luther and Wycliffe were given time to promote and promulgate their ideas so they could seep into the public consciousness. These factors all contributed to Martin Luther having an enduring impact on rebellion, protest and reformation in Late Medieval Europe. Although the impact of certain individuals had a resounding effect on protest, rebellion and reformation in Late Medieval Europe, it is important to note other factors that may have contributed as well. The Black Death was a devastating pandemic that ravaged Europe for several hundred years, wiping out over 1/3 of its population. The effects of the plague however, were vital in shaping many aspects of European society. The plague saw the end of the feudal system and the rise of power for many lower class citizens. It also changed the relationship that many European citizens had with the Church. It was a key feature in many literary and art works of the time and encouraged the people of Europe to have a new found respect for death and God (but not necessarily the Church). All of these elements together forced Europe to become stronger and more advanced both socially and economically. Barbara Tuchman, however, puts forward the view that the Black Death resulted in 'a weakened acceptance of the system, a mistrust of government and an awakening sense that authority could be challenged. ' Moreover, the Plague of 1348 gave Peasants a newfound feeling of status. Tuchman’s view concerning the importance of the Black Death is supported by the fact that the peasants believed they had been spared by God, and therefore had the right to roam the land looking for better wages and living conditions. To curb peasants wandering around the countryside looking for better pay, the government introduced the Statute of Labourers in 1351 that stated: 'No peasants could be paid more than the wages paid in 1346. No lord or master should offer more wages than paid in 1346. No peasants could leave the village they belonged to. ' Though some peasants decided to ignore the statute, many knew that disobedience would lead to serious punishment. This created great anger amongst the peasants which was to boil over in 1381 with the Peasants Revolt. Hence, it can be argued that the Black Death was to lead to the Peasants Revolt. This was a significant turning point of the reformation of England, as Tuchman rightly states 'If all men are derived from Adam and Eve, surely no-one should be held in hereditary servitude. It is possible that inequalities on earth are contrary to the will of God. ' Tuchman echoes the common opinion of the Middle Ages concerning the demand for a drastic change in the Feudal System. I concur with Tuchman on the fact that the Black Death had a significant impact on reformation and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. Without it, the peasants would still be tied to their land, there would be no challenge to the feudal system and the peasants would feel no obligation to challenge their lords that binded them; sparked by the knowledge that 'change was in fact possible and moral authority can be no stronger than its acknowledgment. ' The Church in the Middle Ages was, in many ways, the backbone of English society. Its influence covered many spheres: spiritual, judicial, financial and temporal. The Crown and Parliament frequently challenged the Church 's authority by law. The Statute of Provisions in 1351, for example, gave the King the responsibility of protecting the English Church against Papal provisions; thus increasing its sphere of influence and authority across Europe. Tuchman writes that 'Europe in the late 14th Century was 'highly unstable ', and countries such as France and Italy brought upon themselves 'the most fearful challenge of the century. ' I agree with Tuchman 's opinion that 'the corruption in Spain was an invitation to trouble ' as the English Parliament only brought in two-thirds of their expected sum through taxes from Spain in 1380. The corruption lay with the tax commissioners who were widely known for being easily bribed to overlook families or falsify numbers. 'The lords and royal uncles had not paid attention to the constant complaints of rural insubordination ' and was importantly followed by the third rise in poll tax in 20 years, a significant factor in causing anger, and therefore demands for an uprising against those who controlled them. The problem and corruption in the Church was no less visible in Bohemia. Peasants in the Czech region were increasingly bound to serfdom, whilst the nobles expanded their power by manipulating the law. The impact on rebellion and the peasants demand for reformation was caused by: the Church 's interference in people 's lives, the heavy taxation and the refusal of the clergy (a majority of whom were German) to co-operate with the Czech congregation. This evident racial tension is outlined by Walsingham as 'the definitive cause for the Bohemian revolt ' as well as the main difference between the English and Bohemian revolts; England, for instance, was dominated by a class enmity and differing socio-economic ideas. Walsingham 's view on Millenarianism being a significant factor in causing unrest and protest in Bohemia is supported by the peasant 's strong adherence to the view that the Day of Judgement was imminent and therefore only dramatic change will change the world and reform will be brought about. Walsingham believes that the Hussites took on these ideas because 'they claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong. They therefore believe they will be destroyed soon by a powerful force i.e. God. ' Engels supports this view ‘The Hussites felt the utmost contempt towards the corrupt government and royalty that abused its power by mistreating the people of Bohemia.’ The links between the English and Bohemian revolts can be observed by their respective influential leaders, Wycliffe and Jan Hus, both attacking the wealth and temporal power of the Roman Catholic Church. Wycliffe, for instance, is described by Cohn as 'defending the rights of princes to appoint bishops, tax the church and confiscate church lands. ' Whilst Hus called for the reformation of the church 's wealth, power and what it taught. The wrath of the Church was provoked further by the demands of Hus and Wycliffe to increase religious fundamentalism, nationalism and translating the gospels. The impact of Llollardy and the Crown diminished the secular powers of the church in the 14th Century. The imposed restrictions on the Church 's temporal arm led to the significance of the Church on reformation and rebellion to be decreased to a certain extent; but the fact remains that the reformation has a multitude of possible starting points. Reaction against the worldliness and corruption of the church is a recurrent theme in reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. No one individual or event can be said to be the single catalyst for reformation, protest and rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. However, a group of individuals managed to tap into the growing feelings of resentment and dissatisfaction with the inequality of wealth and power most visibly demonstrated in all walks of life to all people by the Church of Rome. With its control over the spiritual and temporal lives of people in Europe, its failings were increasingly obvious. When plague took hold, it caused many to question the validity of the church 's authority. The Rochester Monk, William Dene, observed that 'priests betook themselves to where they could get larger stipends than in their own benefices, on which account many benefices remained unserved. ' and that 'Labourers and unskilled workmen were imbued with such a spirit of rebellion. ' This view is supported by Tuchman who comments that ‘the Plague to those with the opportunity and ability to seize it, presented a golden opportunity for advancement.’ Walsingham further links the revolt to the Black Death, ‘Kent rose up under the leadership of Wat Tyler and marched on London in 1381, the outcome of simmering resentments and sharp social shifts caused in part by the Black Death.’ I believe that Wycliffe 's articulate criticism of the church gave voice to those who wanted reform, wanted to express protest and, although a conservative himself, encouraged rebellion in Late Medieval Europe. Bibliography/Webliography • Arthur Bryant/ 'The Age of Chivalry ' (1963)
• Norman Cohn/ 'The Pursuit of the Millennium ' (1957)
• Rodney Hilton/ 'Medieval Peasant Movements and the English Rising of 1381 ' (1973)
• Julie Jones/ 'The Medieval World ' (1979)
• Henry Knighton/ 'Effects of the Black Death ' (1980)
• William Langland/ 'The Vision of Piers Plowman ' (1984)
• Stephen J.Lee/ 'Aspects of European History 1494-1789 ' (1978)
• Barbara Tuchman/ 'A Distant Mirror ' (1978)
• Thomas Walsingham/ 'Peasant Rebels of London 1381 ' (1997)
• www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/YALDdeathtyler.htm - Wat Tyler and the Peasants Revolt
• www.spartacus.net.co.uk/YALDballJ2.htm - John Ball