Lesson video

Hello and welcome to lesson three of four in the inquiry.

How big a threat was the peasant's revolt to the powers of the monarchs? For today's lesson, we're going to look at what happened to Wat Tyler.

You're going to need a pen or pencil, some paper, and a nice quiet spot in your house in order to work.

If you need to go and find that spot or to go and gather any of the correct equipment, then please pause the video now.

Brilliant.

Let's get on with the lesson.

I hope you've got the title down, but if you haven't, pause the video to make sure you have.

Right, let's see what the lesson is going to look like.

We have the customary overview and we're going to do three multiple choice questions.

And then, today's all a bit of a mystery.

We're going to have to work out what happened to Wat Tyler.

So I'm going to give you three different points of view, and you've got to work out which bits you trust, which you don't trust.

And then what you think actually happened to him.

Can you solve this mystery? So you've got Jean Froissart's view.

You've got the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's, and then you've got Hyman Fagan's view as well.

And ultimately you have your opinion.

So let's not hold this mystery back anymore and move on to the multiple choice questions.

Question one.

Which of these two people were the leaders of the peasants' revolts? Now I know you're going to get this right really, really quickly.

So I'm going to give you five, four, three, two, one.

Oh, yes.

I know you've got this right.

It is of course Wat Tyler and John Ball.

Well done! And my question two, it could be more challenging.

In which city did Richard II meet the rebels? Five, four, three, two.

I can hear you shoutin' out the answer! I know you've got it! Well done! Of course, it's London.

Brilliant.

I want to disappear for a moment whilst we do the third question.

What did the cities initially want? What do the cities, what do the peasants initially want? Again, I know you know this, so five, four, three, two, one.

Well done.

They wanted to be paid or get more pay for the work they did.

Well done on getting three out of three.

If you didn't, it doesn't matter; I know you will have worked and tried really hard to get all three right.

So let's look at what happened to Wat Tyler.

The mystery that you are going to try and solve today.

You've seen this image before, so this is John Froissart.

And he wrote a Chronicle.

Now in this image, you can see what happened to Wat Tyler.

And so I pose you the question, what can you see in this picture? And also how does this picture help us understand what happened to Wat Tyler? Pause the video for about 30 seconds.

Just have a quick look of the picture to start thinking about what happened.

So pause the video now.

Well done.

I know you already started to come up with some really, really good ideas, but just to give you a bit more help, have a look at this.

Well in the picture, we can see Richard II, and he's addressing, he's talking to the peasant army, which I've also labelled.

You can see Wat Tyler is about to have a man with a sword kill him.

And that man is the Mayor of London.

We're going to discover his name later on.

So.

How does his picture help us understand what happened to Wat Tyler? Well, it gives us a lot of clues.

So let's have a go.

What does John Froissart say happened to Wat Tyler? In this picture, I can see Wat Tyler being.

So think about what we've just discussed and have a go at answering that question.

So pause the video for a couple of minutes whilst you fill in your answer.

Brilliant! Well done.

I know you've worked really hard doin' that.

Now, remember, you do not have to put the same thing as I have down because I know you will have worked very, very hard in your answer, and I know you've got it right.

So this is what I put.

In this picture, I can see Wat Tyler being murdered by the Mayor of London.

That's the man with a sword, about to swipe down onto the head or neck of Wat Tyler.

King Richard II has ridden over to the Peasant Army to speak with them whilst their leader is being killed.

So this picture, this image, what does it show happening to Wat Tyler? Well.

It shows him being killed by a person.

That person is the Mayor of London.

So we know Wat Tyler is killed and he dies.

So this picture does help us slightly work out what happened.

But can we trust it? Do the other sources that we're looking at agree with it? Let's move on to another mediaeval Chronicle.

So this is the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's, written around about the same time as John Froissart's.

So what does it claim happened to Wat Tyler? So I split this source into two halves.

You're going to read the first half, pause the video and then work out what you think it's claiming happened to Wat Tyler.

We'll have a bit of help.

And then we'll go through the second half.

So track the screen as I'm reading the source out, and then pause the video once I've finished and write down what you think it's trying to tell us happened to Wat Tyler.

So here we go.

Wat Tyler in the presence of the King sent for a jug of water to rinse his mouth.

As soon as the water was brought, he rinsed his mouth in a very rude manner before the King.

I mean, how dare he? At that time, a certain person from Kent said allowed that Wat Tyler was the great thief and robber in all Kent.

Well that's not a very clever thing to say, that's going to cause trouble you know? For these words, Wat wanted to strike the person with his dagger and a dagger is a small knife and would have killed him in the King's presence.

I mean, this person is going to be near to the King.

So Wat Tyler with a dagger near the King, that's going to spell trouble, but because he tried to do so the Mayor of London, Walworth, remember the name Walworth, arrested him.

Wat stabbed the mayor with his dagger in the body in great anger.

So.

Pause the video in a moment and write down what you think is going on.

So pause the video now.

Brilliant.

I know you've started to get the background to this story.

So let's see if you picked out all of the important bits from the source.

So this is what I highlighted and it's in bold.

The fact that Wat Tyler was very rude before the King.

So he's insulting the King.

That is not someone showing respect.

And therefore, if you don't show somebody respect, you're going to get punished for it.

So.

Because these people around the King, they decide to taunt him.

They decided to mock Wat Tyler and they call him the greatest thief and robber.

They insult Wat Tyler, because he has insulted the King.

And what they're doing is they're trying to provoke.

They're trying to cause a reaction and Wat falls for it.

And he stabs the mayor with his dagger in the mayor's body.

Now remember the mayor's name? What is it? Begins with a W.

Oh.

And, oh, I can hear you shout out! It's Walworth.

Remember, remember.

Walworth is the Mayor of London.

Well, that's only half the story.

Let's have a look at the other half.

So we got to the point of Wat, in anger, stabbing the Mayor of London.

Did we see that on the last picture by John Froissart? I don't think we did.

Hmm.

So.

The Anonimalle Chronicle, god, you got to love saying that word.

Continues, but as it pleased God, the mayor was wearing armour and took no harm.

What are the chances of that? He gets stabbed on the day he happens to be wearing armour! He's very, very lucky.

He struck back at the said Wat, giving him a deep cut in the neck and then a great blow on the head.

Ah! Did we see that in the picture? I think we did.

So we've got something that both sources are agreeing to.

The Mayor of London struck Wat Tyler, presumably with a sword, in the neck slash head area, but let's continue because there's more to this story from the Chronicle.

And during the scuffle, so this fight between the Mayor of London and Wat Tyler, a member of the King's household drew his sword, got his sword out and ran Wat two or three times to the body.

In effect, it means they stabbed him two or three times with their sword.

So Wat has not only been hit by the Mayor of London, but now he's been stabbed two or three times.

Did we see that in the picture? Or did we just see the Mayor of London attacking him? Think about it.

Wat was carried by group of the commons to the hospital for the poor near St Bartholomew's and put to bed.

I mean, how is this man still alive? He's been struck in the neck and in the head by a sword.

He's then been stabbed two or three times in the body by a sword.

And yet he's still alive, and been taken to hospital.

Can you not kill Wat Tyler? Well, as a matter of fact, you can, because as the Chronicle states, the mayor went there and found him and had him carried out into the middle of Smithfield and in the presence of his companion, or his friends, and had him beheaded.

So.

Being cut in the neck, being cut on the head, being stabbed two or three times, obviously couldn't kill Wat Tyler.

So the Mayor of London had his head chopped off instead.

Now.

Does that agree with John Froissart? What agrees? What doesn't agree? Pause the video and write down what it claims happens to Wat Tyler.

You might want to add on a little bit of pickin' out what's the same and what's different.

So pause the video now.

Well done.

Have you got it all? I know you have, so here we go.

We know what happens to Wat Tyler is that the Mayor of London, according to the Chronicle, gave him a deep cut to the neck and then a great blow to the head.

So he's been hit twice by the Mayor of London.

What was his name again? Well done.

It's Walworth.

The Chronicle then states that Wat Tyler had a member of the King's household stab him two or three times.

It then continues to say the final thing that happened to Wat Tyler was that after being carried to a hospital, he's then taken out of it, he's taken into the middle of Smithfield where he is beheaded.

He has his head chopped off.

So.

New information that has been given in the Anonimalle Chronicle.

Hmmm.

Are we getting a clearer picture of what happened to Wat Tyler? Are you getting any closer to solving what happened to him, or do you need some more information? Well, let's look at our final source.

Hyman Fagan.

Well, he has a different point of view.

So once again, check the text.

And then after I finish talking, pause the video and then write down what he said happened to Wat Tyler.

So Walworth, who was Walworth again? The M of L.

Oo.

Well done, the Mayor of London.

So Walworth, the Mayor of London, strikes once, twice, and Tyler falls back on his horse, wounded in the neck and head.

Is that similar to what you've seen from John Froissart and the Anonimalle Chronicle? Is there anything that's the same there? It might be.

Now the whole royal mob runs amok.

Uncontrollably, is what amok means.

He, who had been so strong, so alive, so vital.

He who had felt the pain and agony of the branding, the hunger and the poverty of his comrades, comrades means friends, and branding means where you're given a name.

You're made into something and the tears of their families.

He who had devoted his life to this change.

That is, for the villains, the peasants, to finally get their freedom.

So that all might live in peace and happiness.

They were murderers, murdering in cold blood, the man who had approached them in good faith.

Well.

What does Hyman Fagan tell us about what happened to Wat Tyler? What's the same, what's different to what we've looked at on the previous two sources? So pause the video in a moment to write down your thoughts.

Pause video now.

Well done.

I know you've got all of these and I know you've got a really good list of what stays the same, what information is the same and what has changed.

So what does Hyman Fagan claim happened to Wat Tyler? Well, he's quite strong.

He say's that Walworth attacks Wat Tyler twice.

And that Wat Tyler falls back on his horse, wounded in the neck and head.

So you can presume, there's been attack by either a knife or a sword that's caused a wound.

There's a slight similarity with the Anonimalle Chronicle, because now he says the whole Royal mob runs amok.

Well the Anonimalle Chronicle claims that a member of the royal household attacked Wat Tyler.

So has Hyman Fagan just made it more dramatic by saying that everyone in the royal mob attacked him? We don't know, but there's a slight similarity there.

And then he goes on, and think of the words that he's using to describe the people that kill him.

They're murderers.

They're murdering him, they're murdering Wat Tyler in cold blood.

This man would approach them in good faith that he would not be harmed, that what he had to say would be heard, and that he'll be allowed to be in peace.

And yet they murdered him in cold blood.

So.

Does that help you solve the mystery of what happened to Wat Tyler? Hmm.

So what did happen? Well.

We don't know is an honest answer.

The only sources from the time all support Richard II.

So they give a very one-sided view.

Michael Senior sums it up really nicely in his book on Richard II, when he states: It.

Being Wat Tyler's character, is not a pleasant sight.

So Wat Tyler was not really a great man.

He had a lot of flaws and Richard undoubtedly benefits by comparison.

So Wat Tyler is made to look worse than he probably was so that the sources can show that Richard was a lot better than him and make Richard look even more glorious and brilliant, but history is not written by peasants.

Oh no.

It would be by the church that wrote it.

And it would be the rich men paying for these histories.

So they would want their views, not the ordinary peasant.

One would expect Tyler to have had a bad press.

Those reports, however partial, are all we have to go on.

So we'll never know what happened to Wat Tyler.

And the only thing that we do have to tell us what happened, are sources that all support Richard and the actions of Richard's party on the day of Wat Tyler's death.

So we can only.

Guess.

What really, really happened.

So let's see what you think.

So the glossary, we've got a dagger, a small knife.

Commons, another word for ordinary people or peasants.

Mob.

A mob is a group of people who attack others without cause.

Amok is another word for uncontrollably.

Branding, when somebody is labelled for a reason, for example, where they're from.

And comrade is just a modern word for friends.

So your source questions.

One, what does the image from John Froissart's Chronicle suggest happened to Wat Tyler? Two, what does the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's claim happened to Wat Tyler? What do these two versions agree upon? What does Hyman Fagan claim happened? Is Hyman Fagan's version different from the previous two, which is John Froissart's, and the Anonimalle Chronicle.

So can you- the sentence starter.

Hyman Fagan's version is different because.

You may wish to change it to Hyman Fagan's version is similar because, and then an extension, can you write a sentence or two that all three people would agree to? You might find that really quite challenging.

There are things that all three do agree upon.

So.

Pause the video in a moment, read the worksheet, and answer the comprehension.

Well, in this case, source questions.

I know you're going to do really well.

So pause the video now.

Fantastic.

I know you've worked really hard answering those questions but I also know you were clever, made sure you made lots of really good notes from the presentation earlier in order to help you.

So here we go.

What does the image from John Froissart's Chronicle suggest happened to Wat Tyler? Now remember, we're after good answers, which is using full sentences and key words in the question.

So Jean Froissart claimed that Wat Tyler was killed by the Mayor of London.

This can be seen by the Mayor of London, swinging his sword towards Wat Tyler's neck.

You can also see the Richard II is possibly distracting the peasant army whilst Wat Tyler is being killed.

So I know you will have got that, so well done.

Next one.

What does the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's claim happened? Walworth killed Wat Tyler, you could say, is an acceptable answer, but let's develop it and improve it.

The Anonimalle Chronicle of Mary's claimed that Tyler had been insulted.

Well, we looked at that.

Remember, he was called the greatest thief in Kent.

Therefore Wat Tyler tried to kill the man who insulted him and was arrested by the Mayor of London.

Whilst was being arrested, Wat Tyler attempted to kill the Mayor of London.

The mayor was wearing armour, so was unhurt.

This caused the mayor and another member of the king's household to attack Wat Tyler.

He survived, was taken to hospital, the mayor found him and had him beheaded.

So there you've got all the stages of the encounter that Wat Tyler had.

So you've expanded upon it.

Again, remember, you don't need to have written the same things I have down.

'Cause I know you will have worked really hard in the answers.

What do they agree upon? Well, the acceptable, is the Mayor of London was to blame for Wat Tyler's death.

A good answer would go Froissart and the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's both agree the Mayor of London played a part, played a major part in Wat Tyler's death.

Froissart shows the mayor killing Wat Tyler.

This is supported, so showing that they're the same, by the Chronicles, which claim that the mayor attacked Wat Tyler.

However, they disagree on the method of Tyler's death.

Froissart shows it happening near the peasants' army, but the Chronicle states it was in Smithfield and by beheading, not by the blow of the sword as on Froissart's.

So there is a lot that's the same between the two, but there are some differences.

What does Hyman Fagan claim then? Well it says Wat Tyler was murdered is an acceptable answer but let's improve upon that.

So Hyman Fagan claimed that Wat Tyler was murdered in cold blood.

This is shown by the fact the Mayor of London attacked him.

This then sparked the rest of the royal party to join in.

Wat Tyler was attacked for no reason.

Remember, in good faith? All Wat Tyler had wanted to do was improve the lives of the ordinary people.

And approach the royal party in good faith.

And then been brutally murdered.

So Hyman Fagan has changed the view of what happened to Wat Tyler, that instead of being set up on with a justifiable reason, this case, there wasn't one, he was just murdered in cold blood.

So, Hyman Fagan's different from the previous two? Acceptable answer would just be a yes, but that isn't really good enough.

So let's see how.

I've got to develop it and say why and how they were different.

So Hyman Fagan's version is different because it blames the entire royal party for killing Wat Tyler.

The death of Wat Tyler is seen as murder by Fagan, but not by the other two accounts.

In both accounts, Froissart's, and the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary's, they highlight that Wat Tyler was armed with a weapon and you can see that on the picture.

And it tells you that Wat Tyler had a dagger in the Anonimalle Chronicle.

This meant it was a, he was a potential threat to the King and his group.

Therefore.

He, as a threat, needed to be either disarmed or by posing threats, he was a danger and therefore needed to be dealt with.

Fagan claimed that Wat Tyler approached the king's group in good faith.

So expecting to be unharmed, to have his views heard, to be treated kindly.

This different to approaching the King's group armed with a weapon.

So if you're approaching with in good faith, why would you need the weapon? So there's a difference here.

So, the extension question, I know you've done really, really well in answering all of those.

Can you push and manage to solve this problem? You've already worked out what happened to Wat Tyler but can you get it to a point where all three will agree? So I've given you a sentence starter.

Wat Tyler's death was caused by.

So think, what do they all agree upon? The three people that we've looked at, the three sources I've given you a hint, perhaps a person who was involved in the death of what Tyler, they may all agree on that.

What do they disagree upon? Now, if you're trying to write something where everyone would agree, you really, really want to know what they won't agree upon so that you don't talk about it.

So.

Have a go at that, pause the video now.

Brilliant.

I know you've worked really, really hard.

Just writing that sentence because actually it's really difficult to find something that all three have agreed upon.

So I'm really, really impressed that you've managed it and well done.

So thank you for today's lesson.

And I look forward to hopefully seeing you in lesson four, where we bring it all together and sew up an answer the inquiry question.

Remember.

If you want to share your work online, you need to ask your parents, carer, or guardian, and they can do so using any of their social media networks.

Been an absolute pleasure.

And I look forward to lesson four of four with you.

Bye!.