Hiya!! There was definitely a history of peasant revolts in 14th century France. By and large Europe during the late medieval period experienced a great number of revolts for a variety of common causes (I'll cover some of this further down). France in particular had to deal with several revolts in Flanders in the early part of the century and then had a major revolt in northern France in the 1350s known as the Jacquerie.

The Flemish revolts by and larger seem to have been in opposition to the attempts by successive French Kings to extend their influence into the County of Flanders, which nominally was a vassal of France, but was fairly autonomous at the time. In addition, Flanders was regarded as fairly urbanized at the time, and it was the cities (Bruges, Ghent, Ypres, etc.) that often led revolts, not only against the French king, but also against their local nobility if they found them too troublesome. This region also had significant economic interests that aligned with England, particularly the wool trade, which also led to more friction. I apologize as I am not really going to be able to go into great depth on this subject, history of the Low Countries is not exactly my forte.

Perhaps the bigger example you would be looking for is the Jacquerie. There are many causes to this revolt, and it would have major influence on the feelings of nobility towards commoners for a long time, as well as being a characterizing term for future revolts. France had been embroiled in the Hundred Years' War, which had not been going well for them at the time. They had suffered major defeats at Sluys and Crecy, and by 1355, the English were able to mount raids with limited opposition from the local nobility. To make things even worse, in 1356, the French King was captured by the English at the Battle of Poitiers, which left the French government in shambles and without leadership.

This was basically the lead in to the Jacquerie. In short, the nobles still demanded their incomes and privileges from the commoners and cities, but were unable to fulfill the fundamental obligation that their status demanded, that of providing military defense. This may be hard to understand if you do not have an extensive background in medieval history, but medieval aristocrats were obliged to fulfill a martial role in society, specifically, to protect the land which they hold and aid the king in the defense of the kingdom. The French nobility had been repeatedly defeated by this point, and were unable to defend their lands not only from the English, but also from mercenaries and brigands (many of whom had fought for the French).

Over the course of the next two years, many peasants and several major cities joined the revolt. It is hard to say if they had any specific larger goals; some cities and smaller groups would issue demands, such as Etienne Marcel, a leader of the merchants in Paris. However, overall, these revolts seemed to be quite simply in opposition to the nobility, a extraordinarily rich social class that appeared to be failing its fundamental social obligations.Part of what extended the lifetime and problems associated with the Jacquerie was that there was no strong leadership in government. The Dauphin, now acting as regent upon the capture of his father, lacked the complete authority of the King. He was stymied not only by the Jacquerie, but by the Estates-General overall and by the nobility. The nobles in particular often played off another claimant to the French throne, Charles the Bad of Navarre.

Charles the Bad ended up leading the brutal suppression of the rebellion, inviting the rebel leader Guillaume Cale to discuss terms and then murdering him at the meeting. This act of perfidy aside, the nobility then acted swiftly and viciously to put down the revolt, with Charles the Bad ordering his soldiers to then ride down and execute all opposition at the Battle of Mello. Meaux was sacked, and massacres of the "peasant army" occurred in several other locations. The net effect of burghers like Marcel supporting the Jacquerie was that much of the nobility began to unite behind the Dauphin, which improved is ability to govern, though still France struggled to maintain basic functions of law and order.

The Dauphin would later offer pardons to various combatants to help end the conflict, though we can't forget how much violence was undertaken to put down this insurrection. The root causes were the failure of the nobility to effectively prosecute the war overall and specifically, defended their own subjects, while simultaneously demanding enormous incomes and taxes from the populace. The breakdown of government was also critical, as demands could not effectively be met and the institutions responsible for maintaining social order failed. Some of this was also true with the Peasants' Revolt of 1381 in England. There were also high taxes and a failing war in that case as well (Edward III lost much of France in the last years of his reign). Government broke down as a regency was formed for the young Richard II, but overall, it was slightly less chaotic of a period than 1350s France.

There is perhaps one other thing that should be included here in the commonalities of these revolts. While I don't think there is any evidence that these peasant revolts directly affected each other, many have argued there is an overall economic cause for the prevalence of revolts in this period. Specifically, the Black Plague had decimated Europe's population, which put a premium on the labor. Since the manoral systems and economic foundations of most of Medieval Europe depended on fixing "wages" (the income of the peasant farmers and/or burghers), this brought into play a fundamental tension. All of a sudden, the work being done by commoners was extremely important, and the ability to be compensated fairly became a huge issue. For a warrior nobility, this meant that they would have to either try to control the population and fix them in place to maintain their incomes, or adjust wages accordingly. This combined with the fact that the wars and devastation from the Plague forced many governments to de-value their currency, led to the perfect economic cauldron for uprisings by commoners and burghers.

Hope this helps!! Let me know if you have any questions/follow-ups!!