Why did France end up winning the Hundred Years War despite England consistently defeating them in battle?

>John of Arc burned 1431
>Hundred Years War ends 1453

Hmmmm....

>it's a "bongs deny reality because they can't come to terms with their history of utter cuckdness" episode

Which conquest? England got conquered by French people at least four times, the last time was 10 years before the start of the Hundred Years War.

Give me 4 times England got conquered by French people

>England conquered by France in 1327

Come again? You mean a French woman overthrowing her English husband on behalf of her English lover?

Every king of England after Henry II apart from Richard II and Edward IV was born in England or Wales.

Can you briefly explain what strategic benefit those battles gave to the english? Proving that longbows are rad doesn't count.

Genuine question despite the jokes.

1066 (by Guillaume de Normandie)
1153 (by Henri d'Anjou)
1215 (by Louis de France)
1326 (by Isabelle de France)

As you can see conquering England was a French pastime repeated about once every century. They let just about everyone in France have a go at it, that last time they even had a woman do it.

But when the English got crushed by a literal little girl another century later, the French just felt sorry for them and decided to leave them alone on their godforsaken island in the future. There's a time when what may seem like good-natured fun just turns out to be bullying of the poor retarded kid.

Agincourt and its immediate followups basically forced the French to admit that yes, Henry V had a claim to the French throne.

>french civil war
>why did the french win

???

lol what

A French woman conquered England with a French army on behalf of her French son.

Yes because being born in a stable makes you a horse.

Eternal Anglo BTFO'd

delet this

If the Hundreds years war hadn't gone so terribly wrong for England in the latter half, England would've control a territory stretching from Calais to Borduex.
Verneuill stopped the French from taking Normandy, as well as delivering terrible losses to French manpower
Poitiers resulted in the capture of the French king, and paralyzed France politically for Decades
The other battles humiliated France and allowed the English throne to keep taking and securing French duchies.

I'm admittedly not as clued up on the Mortimers but comparing Isabella taking using a few French mercenaries and putting them alongside her lovers English army and using them to force her husband to abdicate, is a far cry from the 1066 campaign where the country was actually militarily conquered and the king killed in battle.

Your assessment of Henry II ending the Anarchy as a "French Conquest" is lacking too, given the country was already conquered and the entire conflict was over who should run it, not an attempt to capture it.

>It's a 'retards place modern concepts of nationality onto 800 year old wars'

Mortimer didn't have an army, he just joined Isabelle in exile. He's Jorah Mormont, not Daario Naharis.

And the Mortimers weren't any more "English" than the rest of England's nobility. Mortimer is "Mortemer".

Why do working class plebshits concern themselves with a dispute between the European aristocracy like it had anything to do with them personally?

>the guy in charge of defending the entire Welsh border doesn't have an army

>1066
William landed an army and conquered England, thats 1, you've got 1 so far.
>1153
Minor campaigning in a long and disastrous civil war in England. The French did not conquer England militarily, Henri was given the throne because nobody wanted the conflict to continue. He sieged one castle.
>1215
He was aided by the rebel barons in England, and he was repelled and excommunicated like a month later. Wikipedia said he was never even crowned l m a o
>1326
The king's army deserted from the field. Isabellle's mercenaries never actually won any battles. This is a political coup, not a successful invasion. Her rule was shit and weak as well.
Gr8 b8 m8 i r8 it 8/8

He wasn't in charge of jack shit after he betrayed the king. That much of the nobility supported Isabelle's invasion is another matter entirely.

>i-it doesn't count because the English surrendered too quickly!

Interesting argument.

>I know they never had to fight any English armies but trust me guys they totally would've won every battle if it actually happened
Interesting Argument

>surrender to every enemy immediately, that way we never lose!

English military doctrine everyone.

>Bait this hard, thinking I'm going to get mad
Frog shitposters everyone
:^)

>Consistently

Glad to see the anglo propaganda machine is alive and well.

Really? Reminds me of French doctrine, only a lot more recently.

I just enjoy rekking the shit out of you, but at this point I should probably do what France eventually did as told here:

ok pal

>English

But they were literally French 5 minutes ago?

But that's most of history...

>the French just felt sorry for them and decided to leave them alone

This is exactly what the English did after Crecy and Poitiers.

Bump

French nobles, sadly having to rely on tragically inferior English soldiers.

Because French army was led by a woman, and woman is stronker than man.

So you're saying French nobles couldn't train or discipline their troops well enough to resist a handful of mercs?

Stop with this revisionism Anglo

Poiters, the french practically wiped out, and their king captured! Literally a joke monarchy

There's only so much you can do with what you're given.

No risk of any English kings ever getting captured since they always sit safely on their island hundreds of miles behind their troops like the cowards they are.

>even after the anglos burn an innocent maiden sent by god they fail to win

Why are anglos so fucking shit at fighting on the continent?

That's funny, since the English King defeated the french at agincourt then cucked the French king by marrying his daughter.

You know who actually got cucked, and not in the retarded meme way you're using the word, but literally cucked? The "English" king you mentioned, whose French wife fucked some stableboy named Owen Tudor, thus founding a dynasty which unironically ended up ruling your turbo-cuck island.

Henry had been dead for 8 years by the time Edmund Tudor was born.

>Let the boy win his spurs.

What did he mean by this?

cuuuuuuuck

The amount of clay lost to France by the HRE...

I think France is the only country where the leaders had the balls and were expected to actually lead the troops on the battlefield, right up until the late 19th century.

This may seem self-explanatory to a Frenchman, but bongs couldn't even comprehend such courage.

the eternal anglo on suicide watch

the fourth stage is true tho

>1066 (by Guillaume de Normandie)
Christianized Norwegian Vikings.
>1153 (by Henri d'Anjou)
Inherited. Didn't conquer.
>1215 (by Louis de France)
BTFO'd by William Marshal.
>1326 (by Isabelle de France)
Jealous cheating consort who was deposed and her lover executed.

Semi-related post, but I've been doing some cursory reading on the first and second Wars for Scottish Independence. I think Scotland's alliance with France is kind of neat along with the overall interpersonal rivalries among English and Scots in the period. Another aspect that interests me is the tactical developments by the English, like at the Battle of Duplin Moor, which ultimately led to some serious English victories down the line.

So given all of the above, does Veeky Forums have any recommendations for reading on the period? France/Scot relations, books on the Independence Wars, etc?

>Implying she wasn't faking her connection with god

Though a schizo religious peasant tomboy is pretty cute. I wish I was one of her English guards who fucked her in her shitter.

>woman is stronker than man.
Tits or GTFO.

In before someone tries to claim The Marshal as French, when he is notable for being an English nobody who managed to claw his way to the top.

Not a single one of those things is even remotely true, you don't even get points for effort.

...

If the English nobility on the 14th and 15th centuries are actually still French, then the Normans who invaded in 1066 are actually still Vikings aren't they?

One adopted the local culture and systematically intermarried with the locals thus merging into the much larger local population, while the other retained their original culture and maintained their existence as an independent ruling caste through a class system that still exists to this day. Can you guess which is which?

Are you honestly trying to claim that the Normans didn't intermarry with the English and adopt English customs and language?

Either way I've been assured that they're both still literally Vikings because a dog born in a stable isn't a horse.

The Norman ruling nobility didn't speak 'english' when they started speaking it everyone was surprised

Artillery and Catholicism.

I can't tell if you people are seriously this ignorant of your own history or if you're just pretending because your own history makes you so butthurt.

No, the French nobility of England didn't intermarry with peasants, and yes, they continued to speak primarily French well into the 15th century, at which point they switched to the half-French creole known as "English".

Joan of Arc was raped

Do you honestly think that the Viking nobility that conquered Normandy married peasants?

That crime was punished by God though, because since that day all englishmen looks like shit. Yellow teeth and bad red skin are the way God chosed to collectively punish english people as a whole for this horrible act. We call it original sin 2:0 , chav edition.

t. catholic scholar.

No she wasn't, if she had she obviously would have said so during the trial.

>Viking nobility
lmao what

Their leader Rollo married some low rank French woman, and all the other Vikings who settled in Normandy intermarried with locals. Of William the Conquerors 32 great-great-great-grandparents, one was Rollo, and the other 31 were French.

>what are jarls?

Guess what, the Anglo-Normans intermarried with the locals, at all levels, too! Some of them even changed their family names to English ones. Not anglicising, but completely changing them.

Sure, the most undeserving footsoldiers maybe. Not those who made up 100% of England's post-1066 nobility and whose boots you're still licking to this very day.

>Anglo-Normans
lmao, just how buttblasted do you have to be to make up such a name for literal French people.

Anglo-Norman is literally the accepted academic term.

Look at any of the knights and nobles who settled in England and they or their families will have started intermarrying within a couple of generations.

>Anglo-Norman is literally the accepted academic term.
You mean the term invented by anally ravaged English historians. The butthurt is an integral part of your culture at this point.

>Look at any of the knights and nobles who settled in England and they or their families will have started intermarrying within a couple of generations.
With other noble families you dolt. Nobility doesn't fucking intermarry with peasants. And there has been no social mobility since 1066 to speak of. Look at every single ducal house in Britain. Those who aren't of Scottish or Irish lineage are French, every single one, with the sole exception of the dukes of Wellington. And those are the families that still own most of Britain today.

And guess what?! The English had their own nobility for the Normans to intermarry with!

>French

Don't you mean viking, by your own standards?

>France and balls in the same sentence

The 100 year war was nothing but a civil war between france and his most powerfull vassal.
Richard lionheart didn't spend a year in england, and he spoke french
After 1066 england was nothing more than a bunch of rape babies from french men and anglo-saxon women
England is the mexico of europe before mexico was even a thing

It's all true. Stay salty

English kings were always at the field of battle. Its the French that sat at their royal palace getting fat. Nice excuses for France having weak cuck kings

if you want the real reason it's because Henry V died and his infant son was insane

french nobility didnt mix with the general population of the british isles. i thought this was common knowledge?

why is this board so anti-Britain? Most of it isn't even memes it comes across as real spite and butthurt

we've cucked virtually every country on the planet at this point, comes with the territory

English kings were far more martial than French kings actually

There's a lot of psychological analysis to be made from this post.

Of course it's true. France seized the British crown numerous times

Examples please.

Nigga I may not like you, but I do like your digits.
11 and 77 are signs of the coming prophet

...

>despite England consistently defeating them in battle

Maybe because in real war battles don't account for most of the result ? Imagine that, for every battle in the HYW, there were 10 sieges. There were also naval battles, campaigns, local troubles, religious turmoil over the western schism.
Have you ever heard of Bertrand du Guesclin ? The man managed to free every territory that Edward III captured, with only one pitch battle, the battle of Pontvaillan, where french and breton soldiers trapped the english and managed to defeat them in an unfair battle where they vastly outnumbered them.

France won the HYW because they managed to reform their army, to marshall and discipline the aristocracy, and create a modern army. But even before that, the HYW were mostly a cyclic conflict with moments where the french dominated, and moments where the english dominated. In fact, the battle of Castillon wasn't seen at the time as the end of the war ; The kings of england still expected to fight again to control Aquitaine and Normandy. It is simply that the parliament of England denied that, probably because it was a moment where the english sentiment was starting to grow and they wanted to cull out the pompeous, french-speaking aristocrats.

the only successful one on that list was William the Bastard, and he wasn't even French

Nigger the local nobility was completely replaced.