Hundred Years War

Introduction

The term “Hundred Years war was” coined in France in the early  years of 1860s basically  to describe the conflicts that ensued  between France  and England  from 1337 to 1453.The struggle is believed to have lasted more than one hundred years with period of peace agreements in between. The conflict was characterized by a state of warfare punctuated by truces in between this period. [1]As observed by Sumption, J (1999) even such periods when peaceful situation prevailed there was a kind of cold war that existed between the two antagonistic fiefdoms. The hostilities between the two sides spilled to other parts of the continental perhaps giving rise to other conflicts that were witnessed especially the Spanish civil war in 1360s.

            This was not the first battle for the two sides; they had been at war on many other occasions before with the most recent ones being fought between 1294 to 1297 and 1324 to 1327.These wars were mainly over the ownership of territories which England claimed from France. By the end of the thirteenth century France had lost some territories. England on the other hand had lost control of many lands such as Normandy. In 1259 the two sides signed a treaty which was known as the treaty of Paris where King Henry agreed to hold Aquitaine which was an important possession due to the wine trade. This treaty did not last as the war broke out later when the French king ambitious plan to expand his territory aimed at confiscating the duke’s land. [2]The conflict ensued with two sides braving for a fight with the slightest provocation. The relations between the two sides were volatile; therefore when King Edward 11 ascended into power in 1327 the situation became stormier. (Allmand, C. 1988)

Causes of the war

The specific events which led   to the war happened  in France was largely a succession issue, where for many centuries there had been unbroken chain of the Direct Capetian  sons especially the firstborns had been handed down the kingship. This has been described as one of the longest continuous power dynasty in the history of medieval Europe. Close in 1314 when one of the direct Capetain died he left the throne to one of his three male heirs. This did not happen as a complicated situation occurred when the first male heir died; therefore the baton was passed to the third son Charles the Forth.

Death of King Charles the fourth made the matters worse as he did not leave any direct male heir. His death created a crisis as he only left a daughter whom by virtual of the law could not inherit the throne. The French crown was to be passed to the Phillip the sixth since he was the nearest heir on the male line. This conflict ensued as Edward laid a claim on the throne as he was the closest relative on the female lineage as he was the son of Isabella who was a sister to the dead king.

Through the interpretation of the Feudal laws Edward was the legitimate heir of the kingdom in France by the fact that he was the only male descendant of the Capetian dynasty who was alive by then. [3]The French nobility, on the other hand, balked at the view of a foreign ruler, specifically one who was also England’s king. They held their ground with their assertion based on their interpretation of the old Salic law which stated that the kingdom could not pass down to a woman or even through her down to her offspring. [4]They maintained their ground that the most senior male was to be the legitimate heir as far as France was concerned. The French crown later passed to Philip VI who was   the closest heir through the male line. (Allmand, C. 1988)

When France threatened to confiscicate duchy of Aquitaine Edward was compelled to pay homage to Philip finally recognizing him as the legitimate heir of the kingdom in France. The conflict between the two people did not end here but continued the time when Philip made real his threat to confiscate the duchy at a round 1337 marking the beginning of the longest conflict in the history.

It is clear that one of the causes of this long war can be largely attributed to the marriage, the complex situation that ensued requiring the interpretation of the law was a disagreement between royal families. The marriage between Isabella and who was French to Edward the second who was then the King of England later came to complicate the matters which eventually led to a war that lasted many decades. The problem with Isabella’s situation is that she had many brothers but had no nephews, therefore when Charles ascended to the throne; issues became more complicated as he did not have a direct heir leading to the crush with the English men.

On the other hand the England king hated the issue of paying homage to the French throne. They found this practice very humiliating; therefore they were determined to prevent the kingship from going to their arch rivals. French on the other hand could not hear anything of an English king therefore their determination to keep the throne on their side. This battle can be described as the battle of titans as it involved the royal families who were not ready to yield power to their rivals. The battle was mainly about kingdom and ambition to control the largest part of Europe. For a long time the English kings referred themselves as Kings of France as well, this can be attributed to Edwards urge to be the king of France. Isabella had a great control as she was holding the royal duties by virtue of being the mother to the person who would be the king once he matures. She was determined to lay control of her motherland through having her direct relative as the king of both England and France. Perhaps a war could have been avoided if her wish came true but again the traditional had to be followed. Sumption, J. (1990) in his book The Hundred Years War describes the war as the rivalry between two cousins leading to many years of violence.

The pressure from the French nobles who were residing in England also contributed to this war. The people were pressuring King Edward to rightfully take what belonged to him; they believed that he was the right person to succeed Charles. To many this could have been considered the most unpatriotic act as it meant selling their loyalty to a foreign throne.[5] This pressure finally gave the king the much needed energy up to an extent where he declared himself the king of France on several occasions though he later came to withdraw the title. (Allmand, C. 1988)

Another factor that led to this long battle was the intentions of the English rulers to continue occupying France. For a long time England continue claiming part of the French territory. For more than one hundred years, English nobles had laid claim to the French Kingdom. By then France was not a united nation, the English monarchs were by this period holding large tracts of the region owned by the French throne. Apart from owning these large tracts of land they also wanted to rule them also. France by this time was the smallest nation in Europe but they were very determined to maintain their sovereignty. This perhaps contributed to the rivalry that ensued between the two nations for so long. England intention to occupy France and, make part of its territory and the spirited desire of the French people to maintain their freedom brought a crush of interest which was heightened by the rivalry between cousins who wanted to be part of the missions that fulfils the ambition of their nations.

            The land which lay along the Atlantic coasts and the channel used by England as the first line of defense against any external aggression. It was such an important point of this nation such that they relied on it to win most of the battles. It was a life line as far as England security and existence was concerned. Through the marriage of King Henry the second this territory was held by England. King Edward the third was very much determined to keep this territory and at the same time provide him with bridgehead giving him an upper hand as far as future expedition to the other regions was concerned.[6] The urge to retain what his predecessors had acquired and the desire to lay claim on the territory of the French King led to his attacks which culminated with to a war that was put in the history records as the longest. (Curry, A. 1993)

         The major cause of the world longest war has been attributed to the economic interest. This factor has also led to many wars in the world before and after this major war. It seems that economic interests play a major role as far as world peace is concerned. They are subjects who would like to control major economic interests therefore leading to crush between communities. Wealth acquisition has been one of the most driving forces for men. Each and every one of them wants to amass wealth especially at the expense of the other. [7]The England Kind was interested with the areas which would bring wealth into his territory. He was ready to do anything at his expense to acquire these regions. One commodity that came in abundant from a territory that England was laying claim was wine. (Sumption, J. 1990)

Gasgony was one of the largest exports of this commodity which formed a very integral part in the diet of the Englishmen. England on the other hand was the largest producer of wool. Other countries envied her ability to supply different region with a product that was very important to everyone in the region especially during the biting winter seasons. The two counties continued with the bid to control trade in this region as it was very lucrative.[8] Every king wanted to have a say as far as this money minting activity. Any action that touched on the trade rubbed the players the wrong way and could have attracted their wrath. For example when King Phillip arrested the English merchants and withdrew their privileges of Flemish craft guilds and towns a revolt was witnessed leading to plans of making an alliance with in England to be scuttled. (Sumption, J. 1990)

England wanted to have the monopoly of controlling trade within this region so that it can emerge as the strongest economy in the heart of           Europe. She wanted to have the control of major economic activities such as shipping and trade. She knew that through such control overpowering France which was then the most powerful nation in Europe would be an easy task. Control of most of the harbors within the region gave any country an upper hand as far as shipping business. This provided a good platform through which nations could earn revenue through imposition of taxes on all the goods that passed through such facilities. [9]This revenue was very vital as far as military preparedness was concerned it provided the much needed funds for the maintenance of armies and mercenaries. This made France to have such a powerful military force that perhaps helped them to emerge victorious in most of the battles including this long war. Its economic prowess and military might made it one of the strongest nations in Europe at this period. (Curry, A. 1993)

The issue of Scotland emerged as one of the factors that lead to this ten decades war between Europeans powers. [10]England had all along supported dissent powers within Scotland prompting this Scandinavian nation to utilize the chance presented to it by the looming conflict to its advantage. Scotland allied with the French something which did not auger well with the Englishmen as they felt threatened in terms of regional control. This gave them every reason to declare war with her neighboring for the sake of maintaining status quo. (Spitz, L. 1987)

England desire to maintain her status in the continent gave her every reason to engage with in war with one of her neighbors. This war spelt doom to this economic might of the medieval Europe as they were not only defeated in the course but the war brought great suffering and shame to this nation.

Victory for France

Though England had put a very spirited fight at the beginning of the war they suffered heavy losses towards the end as their rivals became more powerful and a force to reckon. France had initially suffered a defeat as they lost most of the vital territories to England. This lowered the morale of the fighters but eventually they were able to overcome this misfortune transforming to a victorious affairs which finally led to their success. [11]There are several reasons that contributed to the victorious glory of France despite their poor show at beginning of the war. One of the major reasons was the enormous wealth at its possession. Resources are very important when it comes to any battle. They determine the level of preparedness and also the ability of any nation to withstand any aggression especially along one as was the case with France. The amount of wealth at disposal will determine the might of the military which eventually dictates the tactics to be employed in the battle. (Jensen, L. 1981)

Effects of the war

France position in European politics played a major role towards a victorious outcome in this major warfare. This nation was one of the powerful forces as far as politics were concerned in medieval Europe. The political leadership in this European power played a great role in ensuring victory. Its alliance with other European powers served to her advantage, one such alliance that proved very helpful was the friendship with the Scots. This show of unity and friendship ensured that the French people maintained their pride as a force within this territory. The Scots provided the much needed support as far as this war was concerned. The mercenaries who were useful in the battle were drawn from this region giving French an upper hand. France played this card as they had enough resources to hire mercenaries who would fight alongside her army hence the victorious outcome. [12]On the other hand England was experiencing financial constraints even to a point that they could not pay the soldiers. This was very demoralizing for the fighters as it lowered their energies and will to fight for their nation. This fact worked to the advantage of the French army as they were able to drive back the dissenting voices within the England Fighting force. (Jensen, L. 1981)

As seen earlier trade control played a major role as one of the factors that led to this warfare. Ability to control the key trading points was the ultimate goal of each of the players in this battle. When France captured the Channel trade routes and gained the full control of this vital point, they were able to muscle up it energy through collection of taxes which were used to finance the course of the war. England on the other hand was suffering from the opposition from its own citizens who felt that this war was taking a great toll on their lives and wealth. Majority felt that this war was not their own and that is the reason why they insisted on the King financing from his own wealth instead of taxing the already burdened subjects. This was the case with the French throne but with the wealth they were collecting and international support they were able to continue with their course without putting much load on the subjects (Jensen, L. 1981)

Joan the Arc together with Charles the sixth brought new hope when France was at the brink of collapsing from the defeat of the Englishmen. The two were able to organize France forming a formidable force which helped in capturing English towns which lay along the Norman border. Even after her death, Joan the Arc spirit continued to inspire the nation. They did not stop instead they aggressively moved to the battle with a renewed battle ready to fulfill her wishes of conquering England. Defection of the nobles who were loyal to England to the French side further weakened England ultimately leading to its collapse as far as territory control was concerned.

This war had some far reaching effects as far as social and economic situation was concerned in this region of Europe. [13]These effects were both positive and negative for each player. France emerged victorious in this battle; this brought a lot pride in this nation becoming an even major player in the field of medieval politics. England suffered a humiliating defeat bruising her ego and lowering her pride as far as control in Europe was concerned. (Jensen, L. 1981)

The hundred year war left marks that were hard to heal in the faces of the two nations. It inflicted misery on both nations where subjects were left poor due to the misfortunes that befell them in the course of the war. Louis the eleventh ,the successor of Charles the eighth, was able to unite France once more as he benefited from the destruction of the feudal classes which had caused great disunity in the society, he enjoyed the support of the middle class which became very influential in new France. Right from the ruins of the war the King was able to bring the nation to a new level.

Conclusion

The Hundred years war remain the longest battle fought up to this time, this is a war that shaped the history in a way never seen before. It led to massive destruction of property and deaths. Human beings have never learnt from the history as they continue to use warfare to settle issues as it happened in the medieval times. It has been clearly been demonstrated that fighting for resources is not a recent affair, it is something which had lived with us for a long time and perhaps will continue to shape the path of the world for generations to come. In history there are lessons to learn, this war also had plenty of them to offer to current generation and also to the future dwellers of this planet, peace is an important component for the advancement of humans. After war people make friendships which help us to avoid a nasty situation in the future as it happened with the two powers which continue to call the shots as far as the world political influence is concerned.

Bibliography

Allmand, C. (1988) The Hundred Years War Cambridge,

Curry, A. (1993) The Hundred Years War, London,

Sumption, J. (1990) The Hundred Years War, London, Osprey Publishers,

Jensen, L. (1981). Renaissance Europe. Lexington, MA: Heath.

Spitz, L. (1987). The Renaissance and Reformation Movements, St. Louis: Concordia.

[1] Sumption, J. (1990) The Hundred Years War, London, Osprey Publishers,

[2] Allmand, C. (1988) The Hundred Years War Cambridge,

[3] Allmand, C. (1988) The Hundred Years War Cambridge,

[4] Allmand, C. (1988) The Hundred Years War Cambridge,

[5] Allmand, C. (1988) The Hundred Years War Cambridge,

[6] Curry, A. (1993) The Hundred Years War, London,

[7] Sumption, J. (1990) The Hundred Years War, London, Osprey Publishers,

[8] Sumption, J. (1990) The Hundred Years War, London, Osprey Publishers,

[9] Curry, A. (1993) The Hundred Years War, London,

[10] Spitz, L. 1987. The Renaissance and Reformation Movements, St. Louis: Concordia.

[11] Jensen, L. 1981. Renaissance Europe. Lexington, MA: Heath.

[12] Jensen, L. 1981. Renaissance Europe. Lexington, MA: Heath.

[13] Jensen, L. 1981. Renaissance Europe. Lexington, MA: Heath.