Yes he was. That is why he took part in the Peasants Revolt in 1381. If he was a royal or if he was rich then he would be okay with the taxes (which were a problem at the time after the black death) and would be able to pay them.
Peasant
Wat Tyler was the leader of the Peasant's Revolt in 1381 against King Richard II.
Wat Tyler started the peasant revolt in 1381.
Wat Tyler may have been a hero to his followers in the Peasant's Rebellion, but would have appeared to be a traitor to his king.
Wat Tyler-he started the peasants' revolt and marched to London to rebel however he was beheaded!
If you're referring to The Peasant's Revolt, aka; Wat Tyler's Rebellion, that was in June of 1381.
He was hung, drawn and quartered in the same manner as William Wallace of "Braveheart " fame. Tyler was the leader of the "Peasant Rebellion" that occurred during the reign of Richard the Second of England in about the year 1381
Wat Tyler and John Ball were involved in the peasants revolt of 1381 .But the person who started was actually Wat TylerWat Tyler (pronounced = What Tiler)
It ended during the end of the summer of 1381
Tyler was a complex figure, often viewed as both a good and bad peasant depending on perspective. On one hand, he led the Peasants' Revolt in 1381, advocating for the rights and better treatment of the lower classes, which can be seen as a noble cause. However, his methods included violence and unrest, which ultimately led to harsh repercussions for the peasantry. Thus, his legacy is a mix of both heroic leadership and the consequences of rebellion.
In most cases a peasant became a peasant by default. If the parents where peasants the child was also a peasant.
A peasant