The Hundred Years War: England and France at War c.1300-c.1450

May 11, 2010 | In: Books

Product Description
This is a comparative study of how the societies of late-medieval England and France reacted to the long period of conflict between them commonly known as the Hundred Years War. Beginning with an outline of the events of the war, the book continues with an analysis of contemporary views regarding the war. Two chapters follow that describe the military aim of the protagonists, military and naval organization, recruitment, and the raising of taxes. The remainder o… More >>

The Hundred Years War: England and France at War c.1300-c.1450






3 Responses to The Hundred Years War: England and France at War c.1300-c.1450

Avatar

Michael A Neulander

May 11th, 2010 at 6:05 pm

Read this for graduate history course in medieval history.

Christopher Allmand, is an excellent historian who tells the story of the Hundred Years War in a very succinct manner. End of 14th C England emerges with a real national identity. Edward III 1327-77. An example, 1362 Edward III has official records kept in English, not French, moving away from Norman influence, this is a defining moment. This helps English literature to flourish. A political identity is being built as well.

Edward III (13 November 1312 – 21 June 1377) was one of the most successful English monarchs of the Middle Ages. He remained on the throne for 50 years; no English monarch had reigned as long since Henry III, and none would until George III. Having restored royal authority after the disastrous reign of his father, Edward II, he went on to transform England into the most efficient military power in Europe. To a large extent, Edward III can be credited with the birth of the English nation. He pushes idea of 100 Year’s war his reign saw vital developments in legislature and government–in particular the evolution of the English parliament–as well as the ravaging of the Black Death. Where 1/3 population dies which also causes him to scale back on 100 Year’s war.

Parliament as a representative institution was already well established by the time of Edward III, but the reign was nevertheless central to its development. During this period membership in the English baronage, formerly a somewhat indistinct group, became restricted to those who received a personal summons to parliament. This happened as parliament gradually developed into a bicameral institution. Yet it was not in the House of Lords, but in the House of Commons that the greatest changes took place. The widening of political power can be seen in the crisis of the Good Parliament, where the Commons for the first time–albeit with noble support–was responsible for precipitating a political crisis. In the process, both the procedure of impeachment and the office of the Speaker were created. Even though the political gains were of only temporary duration, this parliament represented a watershed in English political history.

The political influence of the Commons originally lay in its right to grant taxes. The financial demands of the Hundred Years’ War were enormous, and the king and his ministers tried different methods of covering the expenses. The king had a steady income from crown lands, and could also take up substantial loans from Italian and domestic financiers. To finance warfare on Edward III’s scale, however, the king had to resort to taxation of his subjects. Taxation took two primary forms: levy and customs. The levy was a grant of a proportion of all moveable property, normally a tenth for towns and a fifteenth for farmland. This could produce large sums of money, but each such levy had to be approved by parliament, and the king had to prove the necessity. The customs therefore provided a welcome supplement, as a steady and reliable source of income. An ‘ancient duty’ on the export of wool had existed since 1275. Edward I had tried to introduce an additional duty on wool, but this unpopular maltolt, or ‘unjust exaction’, was soon abandoned. Then, from 1336 onwards, a series of schemes aimed at increasing royal revenues from wool export were introduced. After some initial problems and discontent, it was agreed through the Ordinance of the Staple of 1353 that the new customs should be approved by parliament, though in reality they became permanent. Through the steady taxation of Edward III’s reign, parliament–and in particular the Commons–gained political influence. A consensus emerged that in order for a tax to be just, the king had to prove its necessity, it had to be granted by the community of the realm, and it had to be to the benefit of that community. In addition to imposing taxes, parliament would also present petitions for redress of grievances to the king, most often concerning misgovernment by royal officials. This way the system was beneficial for both parties. Through this process the commons, and the community they represented, became increasingly politically aware, and the foundation was laid for the particular English brand of constitutional monarchy.

In the 1356 Battle of Poitiers against Edward, the Black Prince (son of King Edward III of England), John II suffered a humiliating defeat and was taken as captive back to England. As a prisoner of the English, John was granted royal privileges, permitted to travel about, and to enjoy a regal lifestyle. At a time when law and order was breaking down in France and the government was having a hard time raising money for the defense of the realm, his account books during his captivity show that he was purchasing horses, pets and clothes while maintaining an astrologer and a court band.

The 1360 Treaty of Brétigny set his ransom at 650,000pounds and 1/3 French territory. In keeping with the honor between himself and King Edward III, and leaving his son Louis of Anjou in English-held Calais as a replacement hostage, John was allowed to return to France to raise his ransom funds. While King John tried to raise the money, his son Louis, accorded the same royal dignity, easily escaped from the English. An angry King John surrendered himself again to the English, claiming an inability to pay the ransom as the reason. The true motive of John’s decision remains murky today, with many pointing to the devastation in France caused by war with England and the Jacquerie peasant uprising as likely candidates. His councilors and nearly the whole nation was critical of the decision, since they had raised the ransom through painstaking sacrifice. However Jean arrived in England in early 1364, looked upon by ordinary citizens and English royalty alike with great admiration. Accordingly, he was held as an honored prisoner in the Savoy Palace but died in London a few months later. His body was returned to France, where he was interred in the royal chambers at Saint Denis Basilica.

Richard II (6 January 1367 – 14 February 1400) was the son of Edward the Black Prince, Prince of Wales, and Joan “The Fair Maid of Kent”. He was born in Bordeaux and became his father’s successor when his elder brother died in infancy. He was deposed in 1399 and died the next year. He was arrogant and had problems with Barons; he wanted to be more of an autocrat. As Richard began to take over the business of government himself, he sidelined many of the established nobles, Instead he turned to his inner circle of favorites for his council, men such as Michael de la Pole, whom Richard created Earl of Suffolk and made chancellor of England. The nobles he had snubbed formed the head of a group of the disaffected who called themselves the Lords Appellant. The central tenet of their appeal was continued war with France against Richard’s policy of peace, an aim that many of them pursued in the interests of personal gain since it is the best way for them to make money by looting France. Rather than the interests of the nation.

In 1387, the English Parliament, under pressure from the Lords Appellant, demanded that Richard remove his unpopular councilors. When he refused, he was told that since he was still a minor, a Council of Government would rule in his place. Richard had the Earl of Arundel, leader of the Lords Appellant, arrested; but Richard’s small army led by de Vere was overpowered by the forces of the Lords Appellant outside Oxford, and Richard was imprisoned in the Tower of London. Subsequently Richard agreed to hold a parliament in order to resolve the Appellants’ grievances; the unpopular councilors were forcibly disposed of (eight being executed for treason and the others exiled) in the Merciless Parliament of 1388. Richard was forced to accept new councilors and was temporarily stripped of almost all his authority. By 1398, some of them are repealed.

However, Richard was more concerned with Gaunt’s son and heir Henry Bolingbroke, (Lancaster his cousin) whom he banished for ten years on a spurious pretext in 1399. After Gaunt’s death, Richard also confiscated Bolingbroke’s lands, this is seen as a violation of Baron’s rights. Bolingbroke’s inheritance was huge, large enough to be seen as a small state within the greater state of England and thus an obvious obstacle on the path of a unified and peaceful England. At this point Richard left for a campaign in Ireland, allowing Bolingbroke the opportunity to land in Yorkshire with an army provided by the King of France to reclaim his father’s lands. Richard’s autocratic ways, deeply unpopular with many nobles, facilitated Bolingbroke’s gaining control quickly of most of southern and eastern England. Bolingbroke had originally just wanted his inheritance and a reimposition of the power of the Lords Appellant, accepting Richard’s right to be king and March’s right to succeed him. However, by the time Richard finally arrived back on the mainland in Wales, a tide of discontent had swept England. In the King’s absence, Bolingbroke, who was generally well-liked, was being urged to take the crown himself. Richard was captured at Flint Castle in Wales and taken to London, where crowds pelted him with rubbish. He was held in the Tower of London and eventually forced to abdicate. He was brought, on his request, before parliament, where he officially renounced his crown and thirty-three official charges (including `vengeful sentences given against lords’) were made against him. He was not permitted to answer the charges. Parliament then accepted Henry Bolingbroke (Henry IV) as the new king.

Richard was placed in Pontefract Castle, and died there in 1400. He is believed to have been killed by starvation (perhaps he refused to take nourishment and starved himself) or otherwise murdered. Richard was dead by 17 February. By 1400, England has a stable government. You see the tensions play out between King, Barons, and Parliament, Edward III did well at this.

France- Lots of problems. It has a much larger population 10-12 million as opposed to England’s 3-4 million. This makes the country unwieldy to deal with. It also suffers from bad politics from a slew of bad kings. Philip IV the Fair (French: Philippe IV le Bel) (1268 – November 29, 1314) was King of France from 1285 until his death in 1314. The Valois Dynasty succeeded the Capetian Dynasty as rulers of France from 1328-1589. They were descendants of Charles of Valois, the third son of King Philip III and based their claim to be ahead of Edward III of England and Jeanne de Navarre on a reintroduction of the Salic law.

Philip VI of Valois (French: Philippe VI de Valois; 1293 – August 22, 1350) was the King of France from 1328 to his death, and Count of Anjou, Maine, and Valois 1325-1328. He was the son of Charles of Valois and founded the Valois Dynasty.

John II of France (French: Jean II de France; April 16, 1319-April 8, 1364),

Charles V the Wise (French: Charles V le Sage) (January 31, 1338 – September 16, 1380) was king of France from 1364 to 1380 and a member of the Valois Dynasty. His reign marked a high point for France during the Hundred Years’ War, with his armies recovering much of the territory ceded to England at the Treaty of Bretigny.

Charles VI the Well-Beloved, later known as the Mad (French: Charles VI le Bien-Aimé, later known as le Fol) (December 3, 1368 – October 21, 1422) was a King of France (1380 – 1422) and a member of the Valois Dynasty. The king would suffer from periods of mental illness 1/2 his life. This is disastrous for France.

France doesn’t have Parliament or any central control due to fact the King was never able to interfere with the autonomy Baron’s had in the lands. Also political problems because many French baron’s side with the English. In addition, the English are used to having assemblies under Anglo-Saxon rule, French have no such tradition. French king has great councils like English Privy but it’s not well defined. No exchequer, but 2 men in control of money, income and expenditure, thus both become corrupt, spendthrifts, bankruptcy. French kings have habit of devaluing money. The 100 Year’s war goes bad for them which causes them trouble. He has no money to pay his professional army, so they become organized bands of highwaymen and robbers even laying siege to towns for ransom money. The French country is scarred by war thus harder to get tax revenue from people.

Lavish living among nobility. Systematic taxation becomes harsh by 1356 because they are having to raise ransom money. Bureaucracy has to use non nobles so they will be loyal to the king and not their family interests. Court is 500 people who are a drain on money, don’t do much. Only 200 bureaucrats do the real governing of the country. Flanders is a constant problem for them. Textile manufacture using English wool makes them close allies against French interests. Gascony in France is an English possession. 1347-50, low point for taxes because of devastation of plague. 1330’s 210K hearth tax, 1378 30K this is a big drop.

Recommended reading for those interested in medieval history.

Rating: 5 / 5

Avatar

G. Hearn

May 11th, 2010 at 7:13 pm

I was looking for a text book, as opposed to a novel, about the Hundred Years War between England and France. Allmand’s book is full of information about how the war affected the transition from middle ages feudalism to nation states, more centralized government (ugh!), and values at the time. If you want detailed battle descriptions, this is not the book to read. If you want to learn a lot about the period, this is it. The book is both factual and insightful.
Rating: 5 / 5

Avatar

historyone

May 11th, 2010 at 8:57 pm

Christopher Allmand has taken a very long timeframe of medieval rivalry between the two great powers of the time, England and France and has done an excellent job of describing the begining, preperation and culmination of a very Bloody and Nasty war between England and France. These two great nations were always antagonistic with each other and had finally reached a “boiling point” around 1300, thus declaring official and unofficial war with each other that did not end until the beginning of the 19th century. Allmand doesn’t use schollarly details to confuse the reader, he writes in a good prose and is easy to understand the background of the French and English Kings who honestly did not like each other, even though in most circumstances they were related to each other by blood or marriage. This book also gives analysis of how the war between these two nations affected the innocent victims such as the villiagers, serfs and even nobility. This was a war of gaining territory, sacking villiages in the name of the King, very nasty and terrible battles and political status in Medieval Europe. I highly recommend this book to all who want to know about how the rivalry between England and France developed and how the rivalry led to war that made it not just a hundred year war, but a war that lasted well over 400 years.
Rating: 5 / 5

Comment Form

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes

Powered by Yahoo! Answers