Summer of Blood: The Peasants' Revolt of 1381

by Dan Jones

From the New York Times bestselling author of The Plantagenets and a top authority on the historical events that inspired Game of Thrones, a vivid, blood-soaked account of one of the most famous rebellions in history—the first mass uprising by the people of England against their feudal masters
 
In the summer of 1381, ravaged by poverty and oppressed by taxes, England’s villagers rose up and demanded that their voices be heard. A ragtag army, led by the mysterious Wat Tyler and the visionary preacher John Ball, was pitted against the fourteen-year-old Richard II and the most powerful lords and knights in his realm, who risked their property and their lives in a desperate battle to save the English crown. Dan Jones brings this incendiary moment vividly to life and captures the idealism and brutality of that fateful summer, when a brave group of men and women dared to challenge their overlords, demand that they be treated equally, and fight for freedom.
 
Praise for Summer of Blood:
 
“Hot, brave and reeking with gore.” —The Times (London)
 
“Sound scholarship and sexy writing make this . . . essential reading.” —The Independent (London), Book of the Year
 
Praise for The Plantagenets:
 
“A real life Game of Thrones, as dramatic and blood-soaked as any work of fantasy . . . Fast-paced and accessible, The Plantagenets is old-fashioned storytelling and will be particularly appreciated by those who like their history red in tooth and claw.” —The Wall Street Journal

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Medieval, Medieval History, Historical, British Literature, Politics

256 pages, Kindle Edition

First published December 4, 2009

About the author

Dan Jones is a NYT bestselling author and broadcaster. His books, which include The Templars, Henry V, The Plantagenets and Powers & Thrones, have sold more than 2 million copies and are published in 23 languages. He is the author of the Essex Dogs novel trilogy. Dan writes and hosts the popular weekly Sony Music Entertainment podcast This Is History. He has presented dozens of television documentaries, including the popular Netflix series Secrets of Great British Castles, and has executive produced and consulted on a number of films and television shows including Anne Boleyn (Channel 5/Sony Pictures Television) and Knightfall (A+E/History). His journalism has appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post; for a decade he was a columnist for the London Evening Standard. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and in 2025 was appointed to the Board of Trustees of Historic Royal Palaces.

Reviews

[Sud666 · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Summer of 1381 was a very bad year for England. It has many names from "Peseant's Revolt" to "Wat Tyler's Revolt". It was the direct result of a poll tax instituted during 1380. As England was recovering from the Black Plague and fighting France, the situation at home for the lower classes was dim. While the poll tax of 1380 was the proverbial match to the flame, the situation was brewing for decades.

The Black Death caused a major upheaval in all of Europe. In England, it did much to prick the image of the all-mighty God and his all-mighty Church, since both the good and the just died equally horribly in the Plague. It also, due to the deaths, caused a massive labor shortage. This caused the lower classes to get more rights and higher wages, as feudal structures began to crumble due to the shortage. In 1351 the Statute of Laborers attempted to fix wages during the labor crisis. This caused a great deal of angst, all of which came to an explosion during 1381, when an alliance of the country peasants, the working classes and poor of the urban areas, disaffected merchants and even some lower end nobility into a huge uprising that threatened to destroy the King- Richard, of House Plantagenet, Second of His Name.

This book covers that entire year of conflict. From the key figures of Richard II, John of Gaunt to rebels such as Wat Tyler and John Ball, Dan Jones explains their motivations and the series of riots that culminates at Smithfield.

Well researched and well written, this small book (around 200 pages) is a great and fun read. Dan Jones is one of my favorite authors for good stories about the awesome Plantagenet family. Here we see what drove Richard II, in his later years, to become such a prick. Also a great historical note- uprisings by the "common" people (versus uprisings by the bourgeoisie) inevitably lead to mass, uncontrollable violence since they are the "mob". The mob cares nothing for politics it only seeks an orgy of destruction.

[Jonfaith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wat Tyler and John Ball may have been immortalized in songs when they led the peasant rebellion of 1381 but the story is Richard II. He was but a child when coronated and his inherited kingdom was in a certain decline. War with France, bad weather and the uncertainty of the peasant position after the Black Death had left the monarchy a bit concerned. Hoping for revenue with the time honored way of pissing off everyone: a poll tax was introduced along with certain legal caps on wages. Locals went wild, fueled by the egalitarian preaching of Ball and the charismatic leadership of Tyler. They marched on London, maintaining a relative discipline of burning—-rather than looting. Many of the mob's enemies were put to the sword including the Archbishop of Canterbury. Richard II attempted to meet with them once, heard some of their demands about summary executions and the King sagely withdrew. A more sober parley occurred between representatives and this encounter encouraged the monarch. Richard II met Wat Tyler at Smithfield. Tyler, emboldened, insulted the monarch at which point the rebel leader was attacked and killed. If initially the populace put fear into the monarch, eventually Richard II terrified the people with a harsh retribution. Somewhere between one and seven thousand were put to the sword.

[Hudson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another great medieval read from Dan Jones who is able to take a bunch of facts and dates and weave a story that moves at a fast pace.

One thing this book left me with was this: England has had many great rulers over the years and Richard II was not one of them. Granted, he was only 14 at the time of this rebellion, but he totally abandoned some of his closest circle in the Tower, they were promptly beheaded and of course, their heads were put on pikes. Weak Richard II, weak!!

Great read, recommended to fans of medieval history.

[Emilie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was fantastic .Jones' style makes the book impossible to stop reading ,it's almost as if it's a novel .He perfectly captured the feeling of unrest felt by both the upper and lower classes ,and explained the difficulties that led to the revolt .He also wrote in a very objective manner ,he didn't defend the rebellion nor did he condemn it ,he simply analyzed it .I hadn't read much at all about the peasant's revolt until this book ,& after reading it I will definately look for some more material .

[Mab · Rating 2 out of 5]

The recommendation from David Starkey on the front cover was a clear indication of the kind of history in this, a history which forcibly inserts thoughts into its subjects' minds, always tells the story from the point of view of the powerful, and has absolutely no time for any ideology that isn't the status quo, then or now. I did not enjoy this.

[Tony · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summer of Blood is a detailed and vivid account of the Peasants' Revolt of 1381. Jones masterfully explains the social and political situation that led to the uprising and paints a vibrant picture of the actual insurgency. However, like the rebellion itself, the narrative peters out after Smithfield.

[Sleepy Boy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A tale as old as time and one still prevalent today. The poor believing the propaganda fed to them that the rich and organized religion have their best interests at heart (And wield their wealth to protect and benefit said poor). The poor realizing that the rich and the church don’t give a shit about them as people, their well-being, their existence and only care about, not only maintaining their wealth but, acquiring more more more at any and all detriments to those the rich consider their lessers.

It would appear the message hasn’t quite been pounded through enough rich folk’s heads given the way our own modern society somehow sells the same propaganda pablum to us. More rich heads (Secular and church) need to be on more poor pikes, simple as.

[Red Claire · Rating 2 out of 5]

Really disappointed by this, tbh. I was hoping for a balanced view that did not buy into the contemporary and depressingly still current paradigm that casts oppressed people seeking an end to their state of oppression and exploitation as “thugs” and damage to property as “violence” while still not ignoring the broad streak of xenophobia in the long history of the English Commons that here led to the murder of innocent Flemish weavers in London.

I genuinely thought a more of Dan Jones as a historian than this depressingly uninterrogated parroting of the fears of the powerful written in the Chronicles of the time. Far more time is given to contradictory castigations of Wat Tyler, who Jones manages to cast as both a Machiavellian schemer and an unhinged dreamer within the same paragraph, than into exploring the xenophobia arising from the oppression of the common people. And the palpable disgust and dehumanisation in his description of the peasant marchers for…being dirty after a long journey on foot and being forced to sleep outdoors is genuinely disturbing.

Deeply disappointing. I do not think I will be looking to buy more of Dan Jones’ work in future - this book genuinely speaks very badly of both his skill and objectivity as a historian.

[Leo · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was sure this was going to be an interesting non fiction but I wasn't prepared of how much I ended up liking it. It was an interesting audiobook with a lot of interesting facts that was told in such a way that didn't feel too "info dumpy" but something that get invested in. Not sure if I had read any from Dan Jones from previous but need to look up of there is more non fictions by him.

[Bettie · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is just so boring - it reads like a text book for twelve year olds. It'll stay on my shelves as a reference book but in all honesty there is nowt on this dry level that Wiki cannot supply me with.


Maps
Author's Note
Foreword
Introduction

Finally, Part I kicks off on page 25

[Christina · Rating 4 out of 5]

I hate to say this, considering the violent subject, but this was a damn fun read.

Historian Dan Jones presents historical facts with storytelling skill. This is a straightforward narrative history book. There's no defense of a thesis, there's no groundbreaking new research, nor overturning of old narratives. You get a blow-by-blow account of how the groundwork was laid in the previous years, the tense events leading up to the rebellion, the botched diplomacy between the crowds and the fourteen-year-old King Richard II, the butchery visited upon London by Wat Tyler and his makeshift army, and what we know from surviving accounts of the chaos that followed as the noble classes regained control.

Thanks to the plague, a decrease in fourteenth century England's labor supply had raised wages. The ruling classes couldn't allow that to stand; they were already broke from the Hundred Years War. So of course, their answer was to enact a law limiting wages in order to fix the labor issue and prop up feudalism. They then imposed three different poll taxes over the years to continue funding the war in France, which wasn't going well. The last of these, in the autumn of 1380, was a particularly onerous, flat, universal tax that fell heavily on the laboring classes.

The King's uncle, John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, added to the brewing troubles by dint of his charming personality. He was blamed for the expensive stalemate in France, and “seems to have found it pathologically impossible to ignore an opportunity for trampling on his lessers,” causing him to be viewed generally with contempt, suspicion, and outright hatred. His constant interference with London politics undermined the stability of the City's rulers. Things came to a head in the summer of 1381. Since the government managed to piss off nearly everyone, the revolt was an alliance of peasants, urban poor, working classes and even some minor nobility.

In short, the rebellion was both a comprehensive damnation of English government and a startling announcement of the new political consciousness of the common folk of England. The lower orders, who had for generations been treated by the landed and powerful as little more than beasts of burden and battlefield fodder, showed themselves to be dangerous, politically aware, and capable both of independent military organisation and blistering anger.

After Wat Tyler's death at Smithfield, there was no organization holding back the angry crowds, leading to an even more violent free-for-all, and a still more violent crackdown. It was interesting to see how various self-appointed leaders tried to convince everyone else to follow them, and how more and more of these sprung up as the crowd dispersed back to their home villages. Most of them led further, albeit smaller, bouts of murder and destruction, but none managed to secure themselves as Tyler's replacement.

The experience shaped the remainder of Richard's reign. “He emerged from childhood, and 1381 in particular, with a profound distrust of his subjects and in particular his nobility. He grew up paranoid and vindictive, incensed at any attempts to guide him or reform his rule . . . At his best he was passive-aggressive, and at his worst a tyrant and a brute.” He was deposed in 1399, “having exhausted the patience of his subjects.” For England, it meant the death of poll taxes for several generations. (When another was attempted in 1497, it lead to another rebellion.) It set the stage for the end of serfdom. And it led to a tradition of rising up to protest policy when the compact between rulers and the laboring people failed to work. Thomas Paine and Edmund Burke used it in their arguments about political theory.

As Jones says in his forward, “In writing this new narrative of the revolt, I have aimed to make the causes succinct, the action as vivid as it was then, and the consequences and vengeance wreaked by a humiliated government as terrible as they seemed to a chastened people. The result, I hope, is a journey into a world both profoundly different and remarkably similar to our own.” By that standard, I'd say Jones has succeeded marvelously.

[00Kevin · Rating 5 out of 5]

The True Commons!

This is a fun history, effectively written as a thriller, as a near daily account in and around the summer of 1381. Reading it at the end of 2020. It is also a cautionary tale of the pitfalls of subsequent popular revolts, including the ones happening recently. The writing is an exciting blend of colorful prose, intimate character development, and chronological accuracy. Histories, I imagine, are tough to write in a way that make such effective use of suspense and imagery. Dan Jones is able to make this look easy, giving us a blow-by-blow account of the events of 1381, while setting a thrilling pace in a modest amount of pages (250 or so). It is the successful history that can make the reader realize how we can still live with the repercussions of now obscure, mostly forgotten events.
Richard II cuts a surprisingly tragic figure, a teenage king under guardianship of (apparently) one of the great villains of English History (John of Gaunt), and essentially powerless around the financial and political considerations of what is now known as the hundred years war, suddenly barricaded in a London being overrun without any clear strategy as to how to proceed. Hard to pity a Monarch, but if you ever were inclined to do so, he would make a strong candidate (especially considering how his reign ultimately ended).
Wat Tyler, and his fellow leaders, start out as exciting and popular figures that are hard to cheer against. Raising the commons was no easy task, and even if there was a fair amount of violent coercion involved, it is easy to forgive them for such transgressions given the circumstances, at least initially. Notwithstanding some questionable methods, the description of the march on London was awe-inspiring, especially considering how primitive the means were.
As the summer drags on, we start to see why this, and so many other, popular revolts so often fail. The relatively modest aims that caused the revolt are supplanted by the ambitions of those who lead it. The once concrete demands start to become more ethereal. It becomes unclear what society looks like if the rebels take over. It is almost as if the success of the movement would be its ultimate demise. Fragile to begin with, fracturing occurs and gains momentum and then more immediate aims of personal gain, in this case primarily looting and personal retribution start to become the focus of the rebellion, and what started as hope ends as despair.
This of course isn’t always how these movements end. As the author points out, the events of 1381 were almost a prelude to another revolt of notoriety to the English nobility: the American revolution. Perhaps a reading six hundred years later allows for the perspective of this one revolt to fit into a larger, longer, historical movement toward the more idealistic aims of the “true commons.” Perhaps in the end, at least some of the Commons’ demands would be met in ways so complete they would have never been able to imagine it.
Rarely is a history written equally entertaining and informative as it is here. Highly recommend as an introduction into the history of popular revolts as well as an introduction to medieval English history!

[Lauren Huff · Rating 2 out of 5]

Enjoyed this at the time that I read it, but in hindsight I ignored a bunch of weirdly monarchist sentiment? I was just reading for information, but the author was antagonistic to the idea that lordship could be abolished, and treated it like a completely ridiculous notion. Kind of wild.

[KB · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summer of Blood, coming in at under three hundred pages, moves swiftly through the 1381 Peasants' Revolt. In typical Dan Jones fashion, it's lively, engaging, and told with a bit of a dramatic flair. You get a good sense of the two opposing sides, particularly the leading representatives; there are many interesting figures to delve into here. Furthermore, it doesn't overstay its welcome by being filled with unnecessary detail or irrelevant tangents.

I'll admit that Summer of Blood didn't leave a huge impression on me, but it certainly expanded on what I knew of the revolt. I always just associated it with Wat Tyler, but much still happens after his death. For how informative this is while still being relatively brief, I would recommend it.

[Kay Adelin · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the reasons I picked up this book is because when people are ignorant of their history, they often repeat it. Unfortunately, we in the western world seem to have forgotten some of our history, as yet another reason I picked up this book is because of how similar those times were to our current times. Just to name some similarities:

- Financing a foreign war with taxpayer money.
- Taxing the poor more heavily than the rich.
- Those who were keepers of justice abusing that justice.
- Keepers of justice not giving due justice.
- Foreigners getting privileges from the government which the citizens did not.
- Corrupt officials in power.
- The elites doing everything they can to retain their power and push the common man down (sumptuary laws, for example).
- An originally righteous cause (fighting for equality) morphing into one of anarchy and bloodshed.
- Criminals joining the ranks of normal people to create chaos to get their way.
- A lack of respect for authority and God.
- Racism against foreigners.
- People taking justice into their own hands/creating their own “justice” (revenge on anyone one didn’t like or had a dispute against, for example).
- A twisting of the meaning of certain religious phrases and/or passages to further one’s own goals.
- The quiet majority being frightened into silence, tolerance or even participation.

All of these things either prompted, contributed to, or resulted from the Rebellion of 1381 (or Wat Tyler’s Rebellion, whichever name you prefer). And it’s fascinating to see how unarmed, untrained, and uneducated people who were largely dismissed by their government as “less than” and pushovers, could create such chaos that ended the lives of several prominent government officials.

To me, it’s also a stark warning against natural human behavior. The rebellion started off as an honorable thing. People were being taxed to the point of starvation for a war they didn’t even care about, their daughters assaulted by tax collectors hoping to get more money from them, and their basic human rights being squelched. They saw criminals escaping justice while those supposed to protect the people grew fat off their tax money, foreigners being treated better than citizens, and the rich wanting the poor to finance their hobby wars. The rebellion began as a fight for equality and justice—for everyone, whether rich, poor, noble, peasant, citizen or foreign, to be treated equally and given due justice.

Even the more violent parts of the rebellion at first were well-controlled. Nobody was killed. Nothing was stolen. Houses, legal records, and property of so-called unjust and corrupt overlords were destroyed, but this was the only way the common people felt they could make a statement, as there was no one they could voice their complaints to and be taken seriously.

A dark foreshadowing for what was to come, however, did spring up overtime. Common people who did not want to join the rebels were pressed into the rebellion by the threat of losing their homes and livelihood. There were also some people taken captive. But in light of the future behavior of the rebels, this was by no means violent and it was well-policed by the rebel leaders (one man who tried to steal a silver cup from the Savoy Palace, for example, was thrown into the flames as punishment for breaking the no-stealing policy).

Ironically enough, it was King Richard II himself who (probably accidentally) prompted the most violent parts of the rebellion. At the first meeting at Mile End, the rebels only requested freedom from serfdom and a limit to the price landlords could set for rent. Richard agreed—but then went a step further by giving the rebels permission to catch traitors and bring them to him for judgement—therefore legalizing murder as executions and treachery as justice. Granted, Richard was only fourteen and probably awed by his own power (a fatal flaw of his for the entirety of his life), but still, it created chaos. Instead of listening to the latter part of his instructions (bringing the traitors to him for judgement) the rebels took things into their own hands.

For the only time in its existence, the Tower of London was breached by a mob. Several of the rebels main targets hid within, and were dragged out and killed. The future Henry IV, Richard’s cousin who was his same age, survived only by the compassion of a rebel who helped hide him from the bloodthirsty mob. Hundreds of foreigners were also murdered, and people were dragged from the sanctuary of chapels and cathedrals which were supposed to have protected them to their doom. Other people made false claims to property and extorted payment from the real owners to keep them from burning and looting.

It seems here the rebel leaders, who had thus far policed and kept their men in line with the original righteous principles of the rebellion, became overconfident and drunk on power. Now they lost all restraint and started talking as anarchists, wanting no government save for the person of the king. There were also rumors of the rebels kidnapping the king. And when Wat Tyler met Richard for the second round of talks at Smithfield, his overconfidence was the end of him—and the beginning of the end of the rebellion.

Many of the rebels just went home. Others attempted to continue rebelling, but several wealthy men and nobles gathered forces and completely decimated them. Townspeople rose up against the rebels attempting to bully them into submission and joining their ranks. Richard himself revoked several of the agreements he’d made with the rebels under distress. Those caught who had took part in the grisly murders in London were themselves put to death, with several of the widows of the murdered foreigners executing their husbands’s killers themselves.

One must wonder what would have happened had Richard agreed to the rebels’s requests at Mile End without tacking on that last bit about rounding up rebels, because it seems after that point that the rebels lost all restraint. Perhaps things would have been different. Perhaps the radical rebels still would have pursued their course of action with the same result. Perhaps lives would have been saved.

Whatever might have happened, one thing came from the rebellion. The upper classes now knew that the common people were politically literate and could, if pressed, rise in revolt against them with dramatic success. They also had to know that even though this was the first rebellion of the commons, it would not be the last.

I highly recommend this book to any history lovers, but especially those who enjoy medieval history, stories of historical rebellions, and those who like to see how history sometimes mirrors modern day life.

Rating: 4.75/5 Stars

(I dock a fourth a star only because a few lines were difficult for me to read and understand.)

[Mak · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm super disappointed in how biased this book was. Jones' didn't even try for a fair examination of the revolt. To him the establishment was clearly right and the peasants were a dirty and deranged mob. I've listened to several of his books before and now have to reexamine every thing I thought I learned. Jones is no historian.

[Ron · Rating 4 out of 5]

“When Adam delved and Eve span,
Who, then, was the gentleman?”

The summer of 1381 England experienced a near anarchy as the commons rose up against their royal, noble, and ecclesiastical betters. Jones strings together original sources and supposition to explore the causes, development, and results of the revolt.

“After a whole day spent in such detestable actions, they were at last exhausted by their labours and the drinking of so much more wine than usual; thus in the evening you could see them lying scattered about on the streets and under the walls, sleeping like slaughtered pigs.” Thomas Walsingham

Hardly a scholarly work because Jones depends on his imaginings to connect the dots between the ancient sources. To be fair, we don’t know as much about seven centuries ago as we think. Maps and illustrations help.

The people had frightened their king, and now the king would frighten his people.

[Mercedes Rochelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

I just read the Summer of Blood directly after finishing Sir Charles Oman’s book about the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. I was surprised to see that these two interpretations of the same event were at opposite ends of the spectrum, so to speak. Whereas Oman took especial notice of how reasonable and restrained the government acted in the reprisal stage, Dan Jones told us that they went overboard in brutal retribution. Although both authors blamed an ineffectual and unprepared government for the pathetic response to the rioting, Jones put much of the onus on Richard himself. It just goes to show me that even in a well-documented society such as this one, we can never really uncover that elusive Truth.

This book was written about five years before The Plantagenets, and I believe the author was still honing his skills. The action phase of the book read very well—up to his later standards—but the early section, leading up to the rioting, dragged quite a bit. Nonetheless, we get a lot of background, which is necessary. Once the revolt gains momentum, we start to realize that not all of the participants are enthusiastic; in fact, we learn that “there was a ‘with us or against us’ mentality that had dire consequences for those opposed”. If you didn’t go along, your own house would probably be burnt to the ground. Well, this certainly puts a new face on the revolt; perhaps some of those unwilling supporters were the first ones to turn around and go home once Richard promised his charter of liberties. Even their social betters were coerced into participating, “which tells us something important about the rebel mindset: they aimed not to overturn or transform society, but to correct it from the top down”. Dan Jones spent a lot of time trying to figure out just what they were trying to accomplish, and in the end he felt that it showed the roots of a sophisticated political movement which influenced future generations.

The description of the terrifying three days when London was under siege—and worse—was well done and satisfying to read. We saw the timidity of Richard’s advisors, and I marveled that the teen-aged king could accomplish anything at all. However, when we got to the key aspect of Richard’s crowd manipulation, I think the author fell into a contradiction. Confronting the rebels, the king agreed to all their demands as a policy of appeasement: “If he had ended his Mile End speech with that, Richard would have played his hand perfectly.” But he did not stop there: “Either drunk on the calming effect his words seemed to have on the rebels, or else feeling an inexperienced negotiator’s urge to push compromise too hard, he told the commons that in addition to the charters, they were all free to go across the realm of England catching traitors…” This was a major blunder, Jones claimed, and “changed the whole character or the revolt.” Apparently the mob took this as a carte blanche to go after any officials, aristocrats, foreigners and personal enemies they saw as a threat to their movement. Uncontrolled rioting broke out all over the city and it was Richard’s fault. But twenty pages later, the author stated “The day and night of chaos that followed the Mile End conference had demonstrated the terrible error of the appeasement strategy Richard had pursued on the advice of his more timorous nobles.” Wait a minute: was the appeasement strategy effective or not? Did Richard act on his own accord, or on bad advice? To me, this makes a big difference, since the author gave us the impression overall that Richard was blameworthy all the way to the end: “it is not hard to imagine that Richard himself was ultimately responsible for the character of the revolt’s legal suppression. There seems to have been no check on his youthful instinct to wipe out, rather than to mollify or discipline, his enemies.” Not hard to imagine? There seems to have been…? This is speculation on his part, designed to support an argument that Richard was bad to the bone. I'm just not sure he can be held accountable for all the actions of the government, since he hadn't even come of age yet.

My takeaway from this book is that the events themselves were described very well, but I don’t think the author was entirely fair in his depiction of Richard II. I would not use this as the only source to read about the Peasants’ Revolt. It definitely gave a lot of details missing from the Oman account, but by itself I found this book too biased. Now I need to find a third account to balance it out!

[Medhat The Fanatic Reader · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read two books by Dan Jones back-to-back for the past two weeks:

This is the 2nd one, the 1st one was “Magna Carta: The Birth of Liberty”, and I am mind-blown, enthralled and fascinated and in complete shock and excitement of what I have discovered and learned thanks to these books.

I am a huge fan of History, but Dan Jones makes reading History extra-enjoyable in such a way that the process of reading about these events puts you on the edge of your seat and compels you to do nothing but to keep reading more and more and more.

What is also worth noting is that this was Dan Jones' first published book; it humbly shows him as a natural great History-teller with a promising talent & future.

[Kathy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learned more about the Peasant's Revolution from this book than the brief facts learned in high school. Reads like a novel, an enjoyable history lesson.

[Allyson · Rating 2 out of 5]

dan jones would have me believe women weren’t yet invented in 1381

[Lolovesbooks · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is another standout example of why his books are so consistently compelling. Even when he’s covering events that have been mentioned elsewhere in his work, he manages to make them feel fresh, vivid, and completely absorbing.

This particular rebellion—one that’s been alluded to in his other books—comes fully to life here. Jones has a gift for taking what could be a dense, complex historical moment and turning it into something that reads with the momentum of a novel. The tension, the personalities, the stakes—it all feels immediate and engaging rather than distant and academic.

Richard II of England emerges as an especially fascinating figure. Jones presents him with nuance, capturing both his strengths and his contradictions in a way that makes him feel real rather than mythologized. And he’s not alone—the book is filled with memorable figures, each contributing to a broader, richly textured picture of the time.

What truly sets this book apart, though, is Jones’s narrative style. He has an exceptional ability to weave together political intrigue, social unrest, and individual stories into a cohesive, gripping account. You’re not just learning about history—you’re experiencing it unfold.

Ultimately, Summer of Blood is both deeply informative and thoroughly engaging. It’s the kind of history book that reminds you how dramatic and human the past really is—and why it’s so worth diving into.

[Theo Paraskeva · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5⭐️. Interesting and well told, about events I didn’t know about, which is good. Honestly I may bump it up to 4 stars later, since I can’t think of any problems I had with it, but the general impression fresh from listening is decidedly 3.5 territory.

[Jonathon McKenney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fine commute book but a little dull at times. Dan Jones has vastly improved as a writer

[Lois · Rating 4 out of 5]

It turns out Dan Jones has always been good at writing a highly engaging piece of history. A gripping read!

[Khan · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.4

[Gerry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Author Dan Jones never fails – he takes History as recorded and makes it all palatable for the 21st century. This book did not let me down any more than any of his other works have to this point. The thing I appreciate the most out of all his works, is that when completed – the Epilogue wraps everything up in context and the Notes on Sources provide an excellent guide for further reading.

Maps and photos of paintings were not disappointing and provided additional value to the book – it certainly brought the story to life for me. The power behind this event, as recorded in 1381 is the impact it had for “peasant classes” ever since. Admittedly, the revolt sort of fizzed out but continued – retribution could have been subdued, but as I look at this from the point of May 2018, May-June of 1381 is nearly a millennial away. It has been and continues to be through the centuries since all too easy for revisionists to embellish, undermine, and/or otherwise make claims that played to the times they later supported. Dan Jones simply keeps to the historical facts and provides a swath of information of both the upper and lower classes, the struggles, the slaughter, the pillaging (and all manner of things associated with the same.) He does this in his normal good-natured style of also attempting to educate a world of people that have little to no interest in the topic.

Having read “The Plantagenet’s” and “The War of the Roses” helped me have a knowledge base of the period in advance of this work. This way I was able to keep (for the most part) names of people straight as I read the book. For people interested in this era, I would suggest you pick up the works of Dan Jones and read for yourself what he recreates for our modern times of an era seemingly forgotten.

[Lissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am falling in love with Dan Jones' work, and this book was no exception.

Growing up, I always thought that the Medieval era was boring, and so I didn't care to learn much about it. It wasn't until I got hooked on the ASoIaF series (and realizing that much of it is set in "real" history, with some fantasy elements and twists thrown in) that I became interested in actually studying it. Adding The Last Kingdom to the mix only made me want to learn about it more.

Jones has a talent of taking something that happened hundreds of years ago and making it fresh, interesting, and relevant to today (this event, in particular, rings true to current events - who can't relate to the lower classes feeling the sting of additional taxes while the upper classes just gather more wealth for themselves?). I love his writing style, and the book hooked me from the first pages. I knew nothing about the Peasant Revolt of 1381 before coming into this book, and now I just want to learn as much as I can about Wat Tyler and John Ball and the events leading up to it.

It is helpful to have a very basic understanding of the various British monarchy dynasties (particularly the Plantagenets - as an American, I never learned about this stuff in school, so I found myself referring to Wikipedia a few times to set myself straight), but it isn't necessary, because much of the information you need is on the page. And the section on notes - well, I may have tracked down a few out of print books from there already because I NEED to read more. ;)

I am definitely looking forward to reading my way through the rest of Jones' catalog of books!

[Nightwing04 · Rating 3.5 out of 5]

Read this in anticipation of The Uprising coming out in a couple weeks. Really glad I did because even though I already knew about the rebellion itself, I never got this in depth into the motivations behind it. Really interesting stuff though and surprisingly morally complex at times.

[AJ · Rating 4 out of 5]

Always up for Dan Jones telling me about English history with his dry wit that makes me laugh out loud and his really descriptive and slightly focused intention and detail on gruesome deaths. And boy did they know how to kill someone back in the day; don't do it like they used to, that's for sure.

One of his earlier books, his knowledge and love of the english royalty shines through and his style, like his image (is he a hot model rock star or a historian? You just may think both) adds an element of storytelling you rarely get from other non fiction writers. If you are curious about this history and want something with a little pizazz along with name and date drab, pick him up you will not be disappointed.

Why 4 stars? Because now i have to read another few books on Richard II. Thanks for whetting my appetite and not serving the meal, Dan Jones! :) In all serious this is a quick read and a great intro for those who want to learn a bit about the end of the Plantagenets. I mean, a few hundred years before Henry VIII summarily killed off the bloodline with hundred of executions. Get into it with me!