The Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453) was one of the most transformative conflicts in European history yet it's often overlooked when comparing medieval and modern Europe. More than a dynastic feud between England and France, it accelerated the end of feudalism, saw the revolutionising of military strategy and encouraged the rise of centralised monarchies, thus influencing modern nation-states. This prolonged conflict not only determined the future of two major European powers, but also reshaped the continent’s social, economic and cultural landscape in ways that continue to have an impact to this day.
Of course, at its core, the Hundred Years’ War was a dynastic struggle for the French throne, triggered by the hunger for power, glory and land by two major monarchies. However, to only see the war in such a light would be to disregard its greater importance, as its resolution would have profound implications for European governance and power structures to come.
The war significantly weakened the power of the feudal lords, particularly in France. Early on, France’s decentralised feudal system struggled to effectively mobilise against England’s more disciplined forces, unable to connect the multitude of retinues in the country under one leader. Such chaos exposed the inefficiency of relying on divided noble armies, forcing French kings to centralise control to protect their borders more effectively. Charles VII established a standing army financed by permanent taxes, a revolutionary move at the time. This greater professionalism in the military and administrative functions strengthened royal authority, contributing to the rise of an absolute monarchy in France.
In England, the war also prompted the centralisation of power in the monarchy but with different consequences. While early victories such as Crécy (1346) and Agincourt (1415) would have boosted the prestige of English kings, the cost of the war became a great strain on the crown’s finances and led to political instability, most notably to the War of the Roses. Nevertheless, the conflict still brought about innovations in English governance such as parliamentary control over taxation.
The national identities of the warring countries was also affected. For England, the war was one of the most noteworthy examples of the country distancing itself from continental Europe. By the end of the war England had lost nearly all of its French holdings, a loss which combined with the shared experience of the war encouraged the English to see themselves as completely distanced from their European neighbours. This was accelerated by the development of the English language, higher in status over Norman French at the time due to the English loss of Normandy to France in 1204. Linguistic distinction further solidified a unique national identity of Englishmen rather than Europeans.
In France, the war united a fractured kingdom defined by feudalism. Early defeats and the English occupation of northern France created a united cry for resistance, which was met with the rise of Joan of Arc who acted as a unifying figure and epitomised the shift in French national identity. Her leadership at the Siege of Orléans (1429) not only turned the tide of the war but also became a symbol of French unity and divine favour. By the time the war ended, the French people increasingly saw themselves as the loyal subjects of a centralised kingdom and monarchy rather than the servants of local lords.
The Hundred Years’ War's impact on warfare was arguably the most significant legacy left by the conflict, as it marked the transition from medieval to early modern military practices in Europe, driven mostly by technological innovation and tactical adaptation. The English longbow was the defining weapon early in the war, as it was cheap to produce and deadly at long range. It allowed English forces to defeat French armies which were most often a lot larger than theirs, as seen at Crécy and Agincourt. The dominance of the longbow also signals the steady decline of the mounted knight, a memorable symbol of medieval chivalry.
Later in the war, however, the French embraced a wildly transformative innovation: gunpowder artillery. By the 1450s, cannons had become a decisive force in siege warfare and allowed the French to recapture most English-held fortresses. The use of artillery not only revolutionised battlefield tactics but also weakened traditional feudal fortifications, accelerating the decline of the castle as a military stronghold.
Such changes underscored a broader shift in military strategy, most notably the fact that professional, centralised standing armies replaced feudal armies of noble knights. This greater professionalisation and centralisation of warfare demanded greater financial resources, and prompted monarchs to centralise taxation, only further eroding the feudal system.
Perhaps on a less monumental scale, the economic consequences of the Hundred Years’ War profoundly reshaped rural and urban life in Europe. The conflict disrupted trade routes and negatively altered agricultural production, particularly in France, where many regions were depopulated by raids and pillaging. This destruction was compounded by the Black Death (1347-1351), leading to significant population and economic shifts.
In rural areas, the war mostly contributed to the decline of serfdom, as many peasants were killed or displaced, meaning that labour shortages empowered surviving workers to demand higher wages and better conditions. Such a shift in labour dynamics weakened the feudal system even more and encouraged the growth of a cash-based economy, with the focus straying from land ownership.
Urban centres, on the other hand, played a hugely meaningful role in financing the war. Cities like Paris and London became hubs for taxation and the mobilisation of resources, growing in political and economic importance. The war also encouraged innovations in finance, including the use of loans to fund military campaigns. These financial tools would become essential to the functioning of modern states. Thus, the disruption of old economic systems encouraged future innovation and adaptation throughout Europe.
Historians often cite the Hundred Years’ War as a key factor in the transition from the medieval to the early modern era. The conflict accelerated the decline of modern feudalism, introduced modern technologies, and reshaped political boundaries. By its conclusion in 1453, the war had not only ended English ambitions in France but also ushered in a new era of centralised states and professionalised governance. The war also permitted the English Renaissance to emerge in disrupting old power structures and encouraging innovation. Moreover, the increased importance of cities, combined with the decline of feudal nobility, created a rich and fertile environment for cultural and intellectual growth.
It is evident that the Hundred Years’ War left a lasting cultural legacy, inspiring art, literature and a greater focus on history. Figures like Joan of Arc have become the subject of countless works like medieval ballads and modern films. In England, the war’s themes of heroism and loss resonated in cultural pieces like Shakespeare’s ‘Henry V' and even with future kings like Henry VIII.
It shaped how Europeans understood their history. Chroniclers like Jean Froissart recorded the events of the conflict in vivid detail, offering modern societies a window into the aspirations and anxieties of medieval society and thereby building stronger relations between us and people of the past. Such accounts are recall the human cost and transformative power of war.
The Hundred Years’ War serves as a reminder of how conflict, particularly those which are so greatly prolonged, can reshape societies and leave a legacy that extends beyond their present battlefield. Its story is not just one of kings and battles but one of deep-rooted progress that shaped the trajectory of European history.
Cover image: William Kent
Comments