I’m teaching two sections of Western Civilization this semester at a local community college, along with a full-time software engineering job. As you might expect, I’m busier than a one-armed paperhanger—and so when I prepare a lecture for my students that fits the readers of my column—I’m not too ashamed to let you share with my students!
Inevitably, the peasants revolted. Two of the biggest and most well known are the English Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, and the Jacquerie Rebellion of 1358 in France. There are similarities in these revolts—but also large differences. Perhaps the most noticeable difference is the savage actions of both the peasants and the nobles in France.
By comparison, in England, the government managed to suppress its rebellion with relatively little loss of life. The government even met the main demand of the peasants—repeal of a newly adopted poll tax. (Don’t get any ideas for today from this, of course.) Only a few of the leaders were executed; the rest were pardoned.
What’s the difference? Why did the French nobility treat their peasants like animals, while the English nobility only treated their peasants badly? I think one explanation has to do with the weapons systems and tactics of the two nations—and how this influenced the relative power of nobles and peasants.
France made less use of peasant infantry than England during this period. At the Battles of Crecy (1346) and Agincourt (1415), the English longbow archers played a critical role in the defeat of the French. The French had archers, too—but they were crossbow archers—and that makes all the difference.
The crossbow is a very deadly weapon—capable of killing at 600 yards. But it was slow. Pulling back the string required leverage, and sometimes a mechanical device. If you got off three shots a minute, you were doing very well. It did not require enormous practice to use—and so the French government issued them only when the peasants were called to war.
Think about this for a minute: in France, the peasants aren’t issued crossbows except when going into battle. In England, the peasants are required to own a military grade weapon—and required to practice with it, every week. It is certainly true that a single English peasant with a longbow wasn’t much of a threat to an armored knight—much like a single upset American with a rifle isn’t much of a threat to a SWAT team—but large numbers of angry English peasants, armed with longbows—well, they could make life short and miserable not only for French knights, but also for English knights, too. Can you see a reason why the English government didn’t go out of its way to upset its peasants—while the French government might not have cared as much?
I tell my students that history matters, at least partly because history repeats itself. The big ideas, the common human motivations, don’t change much from century to century. Right now, the future of being armed in America is looking very good. And when I look at the idiocy being imposed by our power-mad Congress—I’m rather glad about that, aren’t you?
-----
Clayton E. Cramer is a software engineer and historian. His sixth book, Armed America: The Remarkable Story of How and Why Guns Became as American as Apple Pie (Nelson Current, 2007), is available in bookstores. His web site is http://www.claytoncramer.com.
1 Arno Karlen, Man and Microbes: Disease and Plagues in History and Modern Times (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995), 87.
2 Bertha Haven Putnam, The Enforcement of the Statutes of Labourers During the First Decade After Black Death, 1349-1359 (New York: Columbia University, 1908).
3 Jackson J. Spielvogel, Western Civilization, 7th ed. (Belmont, Cal.: Thomson Wadsworth, 2009), 309.
4 Christopher Rothero, The Armies of Crecy and Agincourt (Botley, Oxfordshire: Osprey Publishing, 1981), 23-24.
5 David N. Durant, Where Queen Elizabeth Slept and What the Butler Saw: A Treasury of Historical Terms From the Sixteenth Century to the Present (New York: St. Martins Griffins, 1998), 8.
6 Charles Arnold-Baker, The Companion to British History (London: Routledge, 2001), 48.
7 Paul Van Dyke, Renascence Portraits (New York: Charles Scribners’ Sons, 1905), 193.
8 Barbara Tuchman, A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteen Century (New York: Random House, 1978), 519; “Bows and Arrows,” Chambers Journal of Popular Literature, Science, and Arts (London: 1860), 11:170.