However, as the War progressed, Middle Age came to a close Renaissance have begun and more modern understanding of what countries and Kings begun changing calculations and actions of people involved. Eventually not so much War turned against England, so much England's own barons withdrew their support for it. As much as King would like to cry treason on their actions there was good reasons for them to do so: King getting a second crown on his head might have benefitted him, but it would have been not so beneficial for England or the barons. New way of thinking changed the outcome.
However, what was that have changed over the course of 100 years. To begin with I will describe mindset of Middle Ages.
Middle Age Society
During Middle Ages there was no modern understanding of countries as territory with body of people, language, unique history and culture. Sure, people would use terms England and France even then, but for them these would only denote vague geographic areas, much like suburbs nowadays.
To take this even further, Kings, Dukes and other nobles saw themselves as owners and beneficiaries of the titles, land and people rather than representatives of certain people or culture. Because of that they always welcomed the idea of acquiring more of these titles to themselves, much like building an investment portfolio.
Kings of Middle Age did not govern of even administer things in modern sense of the word. For example, King Richard I Lionheart simply appointed someone to collect taxes in England for him as he spent his time crusading in Middle East. Even when he was not crusading, he lived in Duchy of Maine in France rather than in England. That would not be acceptable by modern standards, but for his times that was not only normal but even praiseworthy.
It was not uncommon to find double triple or quadruple Kings, ruling over disparate swatches of land here and there. Above mentioned Kings of England also held duchies of Normandy, Aquitaine and Anjou in modern France. All that was acquired over the course of High Middle Ages through marriages, conquests and so on, it would take a separate article to cover that.
English Kings were not unique in that. First Angevin dynasty, that held Duchy of Anjou before English Angevins managed to acquire themselves two Kingdoms: Sicily and Hungary in addition to lesser titles such as Duke. Later Count of Provence inherited these titles from them together vaunted Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem from another extinct noble house, becoming at least nominally triple King of places as distant as Middle East simultaneously with Marselle in modern France and Budapest in Hungary.
The most exorbitant example of Medieval property portfolio building has to be Burgundy. Over the course of several generations with the help of strategic marriages, threats and forgery they managed to acquire so many wealthy counties and duchies, that could rival a Kingdom in size. Add to that best for its time army and even Kings were afraid of power of Burgundian duke.
To sum up the whole situation one French King coined term Ile de France (French Island) to describe lands around Paris he has direct control over. The rest of what was theoretically France was controlled by powerful local nobles, some of whom (like Burgundy or Angevins) had much more power than their theoretical superior. Middle Age France was much less of a country then post Peace of Westfalia Holy Roman Empire. Needless to say, these dukes did not heed Kings authority in the slightest. That is how it was de facto.
However, in parallel to de facto reality there was also a de jure one. There was set of rules that was supposed to be upheld. For example, kingdoms consisted of duchies and duchies of counties. Each kingdom had a list of consistent duchies and every duchy a list of consistent counties.
Just like territories themselves, people who held them had a place in medieval hierarchy: they vassals to their superiors and a liege to their subordinates. Counts were subordinates of Dukes and Dukes of Kings.
There were obligations of office too: vassals were supposed to pay homage to their liege, serve under them in times of war and provide them with soldiers and annual pay. Their titles could be revoked for not fulfilling them.
This system was originally created at the end of Dark Ages by the Charlemagne and the Franks who appointed his lieutenants as Dukes and lesser commanders as counts, barons and so on. Then it was gradually spread to other places as Dark Age gave way to Middle Age.
Reasons for War
The disparity between de jure and de facto reality of Middle Ages created nearly unworkable conflict of interest. For example, King of England held three Duchies in France. In his capacity of King of England, he was French King's equal but in his capacity as Duke of Normandy, Aquitaine and Maine he was French King's subordinate instead. That meant that in theory English King was supposed to fight against himself as in the event of theoretical war between France and England. House of Burgundy too held titles in both Holy Roman Empire and France so too would have to face conflict of interest.
The reality is that "conflict of interest" gave them freedom to be independent player who could pursue their own agenda.
Sometime before the 100 Years War begun, the mainline Capetian dynasty of French Kings came to an end and they were succeeded by their closest cadent branch, House of Valois. New rulers decided to bring some order to the Kingdom, for example to revoke de jure Franch duchies, de facto held by English Kings. Technically English Kings, in their capacity as Dukes of Normandy, Aquitaine and Maine were vassals to French King, but they simply ignored this fact and their feudal obligations. That gave new Valois Kings an excuse to take some of their continental possessions away.
At first Edward III wanted to negotiate his way out of it and keep the land, but French King was unrelenting. When all was futile Edward III consulted with some shrewd lawyers of his time and their figured an interesting plan. Edward III was a grandson of the late Capetian King of France, in that regard his proximity in blood to the late Capetian King was closer than that of the Phillip VI of House of Valois. Sure, French succession law clearly excludes women from succession, but it says nothing of their descendants.
From de facto reality there was all to gain and nothing to lose to Edward promptly declared himself a rightful successor to the French throne. Back in the days they did not have international courts to dispute succession, like John Hancock or Rupert Murdoch descendants would. So, Edward III mustered his forces and as double King of France and England landed on French soil.
However, such a bold claim would put various French nobles before an interesting question: who they recognize as rightful King. While most stayed loyal to the Valois King, there were some who instead took Edward's side. most importantly abovementioned Duke of Burgundy.
There was also a pretender to the Duchy of Brittanny. Brittany was in the same kind of succession struggle as France was. Two different claimants, both of whom were named John, picked different sides in war between Edward III and Phillip VI. Edward III helped his loyalist take the Brittany from his rival but from there on Brittany was less enthusiastic in supporting Lancastrian claim.
Burgundy too was not doing it because them believe it was a right thing to do but because they wanted to use this situation so strengthen themselves. They would occasionally switch sides between two pretenders and complicate life for everyone.
This behavior combined with relative strength of so-called Burgundian State would explain many rather dramatic changes in fortune between sides. Sure, English Longbowman did well in Battle of Agincourt. This battle showed that centerpiece of Medieval military, order and life in general, knights of heavy cavalry, are not as invincible as they once were. However, tactics cannot beat strategy and on strategic level it was Burgundian meddling.
Burgundian Dukes wished to carve themselves a Kingdom of their own or usurp French crown just like Edward III but with no legal ground and only force of their arms they did not felt confident to take on House of Valois and the rest of French nobility combined. End of so-called Burgundian State and the following partition of their lands between Austrian Habsburgs and French Kings could be considered end of Middle Ages in France.
Why War Ended as it Did
Lancasters had many battlefield successes. At one time they held Paris and most of northern France. Herny V was treated by Holy Roman Emperor as rightful King of France. In early1400 it seemed that Lancasters won and union between France and England is a new geopolitical reality.
What were against it however are interests of both England and France. Modern person would find it easier to understand French side however it's England that would suffer most. Out of two Kingdoms the French one was bigger, richer and more prestigious. Because of all that it was natural that Kings of the union would spend more time in France than in England, they will likely have Paris as their residence. French nobility, including the powerful Duke of Burgundy would play a large role in such union and would sideline English dukes.
Similar situation happened to England several hundred years later when Steward dynasty of Scotland inherited English throne, we all know how it went from there. Nowadays its Scotland who wants to be independent from the UK. During the course of 100 Years War England almost end up playing Scotland's role in union with France.
That was not what English peers wanted. When their resized that is what awaits them if their King wins, they withdrew support and returned their troops home. After all King cannot win wars alone, as CGPGrey said.
Long Term Implications
That however marks not just the end of war but also end of medieval mindset, logic and the way of doing things. Nobility in both France and England started to see themselves not just as subordinates to a King, bound by personal loyalty, but as collective body with distinct interests. These interests won the day.
These interests also created a sense of statehood that later gave birth to nationhood. People stopped see various landed titles as simply valuable real estate but as countries with their distinct body of people and certain intangible interests.
At this stage it was still a body of elites and not the population as whole. Popular nations would only become a thing in 19th century.
Nevertheless, by the end of War of the Roses the elites created a bureaucratic state out of collection of fiefdoms with overlapping obligations. A state with parliament, various officers responsible to it. They also reformed an army from a collection of small units each maintained and loyal to a local baron into a one cohesive body that answers to the state.
Many of the things that we consider normal nowadays and cannot think of a different way of doing things were created during the change of eras as Late Middle Age gave way to Renaissance.
No comments:
Post a Comment