"England won the Hundred Years' War"

>"England won the Hundred Years' War"

How do you respond?

Other urls found in this thread:

books.google.fr/books?id=zBlTNapElG4C&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=The 'Gens Normannorum' - Myth or Reality&source=bl&ots=4Z_Sd-r_TU&sig=xf3lIip61oqa5xxR2a2i6em0amw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_uJjy247XAhUIMBoKHVs9AGIQ6AEIPzAF#v=onepage&q=The 'Gens Normannorum' - Myth or Reality&f=false
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>Invade neighbor to press claims.
>Eventual result is being driven nearly entirely off the continent and into civil war.
>VICTORY.

"No."

Lord Lloyd is a wannabe historian who doesn't even know much about his own country

he's english, every englishman will say that englan wond

won*

Yes

>died 20 years before the war ended

what about 1066 can they claim that england won here ?

"Then what sparked the Wars of the Roses?"

oh come on that's completely different, and honestly I don't know if the english find William as a good/bad thing

ITT: autistics who can't detect when someone is joking.

England were strong men.
France were weak men.

not quite, france had the best cavalry, their problem was their confidence

Considering the English goal in the HYW was to put a Plantaganet on the throne of France and keep him there, no, they did not. You could argue that they won several of the sub-wars in the HYW, most notably the Edwardian Phase and if you want to call the one that ended with the treaty of Troyes a separate phase, but they lost the others, and ultimately, the big prize.

They won parts of the Hundred Years War. It shouldn't really be considered its own war.

reminder that Lindybeige claims:

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>battle of Zama didn't happen
>Romans carried one pilum
>Vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
>climate change isn't real
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space

>no one used mail coifs
he said, not by itself

>the english are pure anglo-saxons
>the normans were french
>english people are not descended from the normans

>english were ruled by frenchmen for generations
>modern english "nobles" still have french blood from william
>more than half of england has french blood

>implying the french don't have british blood
it's always gone back and forth old bean
few like to admit it but we are close ethnic cousins

FRENCHED

>Normans were French

>refered to themselves as French on the Bayeux Tapestry and London Charter

Then by this logic Turks are actually Romans

by the time of 1066 you could consider them as french

>Ignores that Normans got their own realms in England, Sicily, and Elsewhere.
>Norman historians talking about "Normanitas" identity, centered around the "Gens Normanorum."
>In order to justify Norman agency, independence, and separation from both general French culture AND the cultures of the places they conquered.

>B-BUT THEY WANT TO BE KING OF FRANCE!
Dynastic politics =/= Nationalism.

England won that day, Anglo Saxon England lost and that is GLORIOUS, do you realise how great that is for what happens down the line

>that was the whole aim of the HYW
>the English making merry from all the loot they took was not the objective of the first two kings in the HYW

But napoleon was literally hitler, look at what he did to the faithful, sent them to concentration camps and started from the year 0

Fuck I guess Heinrich II was a holy Roman, annoying that Holy Rome sank beneath the seas and all its people died

And the Kings of England/the UK considered themselves Kings of France until the 19th century

Well, where else do you suppose the first humans shipped off to Britain from?

>How do you respond?
In my native french.

>Normans were french
Shiggidy

Normans were Nordic Germanic Vikings of pure stock and not French at all

It wasn't an invasion, it was more like a fellow Germanic welcoming his fellow Germanic brother inside his house

>Gens Normanorum

Just want to add the debate with this article which challenges and discusses the Gens Normanorum identity

books.google.fr/books?id=zBlTNapElG4C&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=The 'Gens Normannorum' - Myth or Reality&source=bl&ots=4Z_Sd-r_TU&sig=xf3lIip61oqa5xxR2a2i6em0amw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_uJjy247XAhUIMBoKHVs9AGIQ6AEIPzAF#v=onepage&q=The 'Gens Normannorum' - Myth or Reality&f=false

>Henry 8 is the only king who mattered
Even if anyone else claimed it, they knew it would be suicide to claim the French throne

Just norse courtesy

Half of those were true ,but still there are some really retard claims

>Napoleon was the bad guy.

But the brits killed more irish in genocide than Napoleon did defending France from agressors.

And french comes from frank which were a germánic tribe

French are more related to germanics than celts

you do realize that franks were already a fringe germanic tribe and then mixed with the gauls and romanized themselves
french have very little to do with germanics

I'm not arguing the relatedness of Germanics, french, and Celts. I was just pointing out that it's silly to call the Normans French

Wrong because romans said that franks were blonde and pale so that means they didnt mix with any gaul

>you do realize that franks were already a fringe germanic tribe and then mixed with the gauls and romanized themselves
Just like the Normans then.

...

Meanwhile in reality

Look up an image of everyone's favourite Frank Clovis I. Not saying that we know for sure of course, but the vast majority of them are brown haired

And those lads that took over Sicily against all odds were still French. Norman French, yes, but French. It'd be like calling the Hungarians Turanic or whatever after Stephen's baptism.

roasty gettin toasty

Walk away, there is clearly no reason to argue with such a retard

Except they were assimilated by the Kingdom of France, were a part of the Kingdom of France and William was a Vassal of the French King.
You cannot compare Normans to the Numerous Larpers pretending they perpetuate a fallen empire because the French Kingdom was still around and Normans were a part of it.

>assimilated by the Kingdom of France
Wrong, they adapted French customs but they didn't become French ethnically. Your other two points are correct but irrelevant

Roasties forever BTFO

It's Guillaume. And he treated England, as most of his successors did, with the due respect: collected taxes, levied troops and didn't even bother to step foot in that hellhole other than to squash the odd revolt. People either don't know or pretend they don't, but England was a fucking slum until the Tudors.

>but they didn't become French ethnically
Normand are 76% R1b, faggot

>adopted French customs
>used a dialect of French
>vassals to the French king
>had French names
>converted to the French king's religion

Not French at all, no sir.

So if niggers
>adopted French customs
>used a dialect of French
>vassals to the French king
>had French names
>converted to the French king's religion
They would become French? That's bollocks.

They all claimed it until as recently as 1801. Henry VI is the only one to have ever be actually crowned king of both.

Yes. Doing everything a citizen of a country does and adopting the respective country's culture, language, religion, etc means exactly that, no matter what your identity politics tell you.

They did though. After agincourt

>it's another "Brainlet who doesn't know that William in Norman French is Williame" episode

I can't tell if you're rusing me or not without checking.

Williame is the Old French form, we're in 2017 so it is Guillaume now

Thank you for describing Civic nationalism and the way the French have always conceived French identitu

>It's not Augustus, it's auguste. Like, it's 2017 get with the times

Taking time was worth

We copied the English

I'm pretty sure that England did win the 100 year war.

>beat the French at Agincourt by blotting out the sun
>finished off the French at Creshy using the Black Prince
>capture Joanna of Ark and set fire to her

That saw off the French until Napoleon can along.

They spoke a variety of French, were culturally French, and had some native French ancestry.
Also, like a third of the invasion force were Bretons, so it was King Arthur's revenge.

Weren't there a shitload of Flanders soldiers too? I can't recall. I know Guillaume was on good terms with the Count of Flanders at the time.

Yes

There were quite a few other battles after Agincourt you know...

Are the Flanders folk the same as modern day Walloons? Did they speak a variant of French?

>thinks Crécy came after Agincourt

oh my lel my little Veeky Forumslet can't be this illiterate

No, I don't think so. I'm pretty sure it was just Agnicourt, Creshy, and Sluys. I've done a lot of research on this period.

No, Flemish (name for people from Flanders) are Dutch-speakers from northern Belgium. The Walloons are the other major ethnic group in Belgium. They speak French.

You forgot Waterloo and Trafalgar.

I checked and only now realize that a good chunk of the County of Flanders is part of modern France.

Wasn't he supposed to do a video with Matt Easton?

I would agree with him, shake his hand, and then proceed to discuss the other great and noble victories achieved by the Anglo race.

Mers-el-Kebir.

Based Eddie.

>Guilliam
Oh so is the first Hanoverian king of England actually Georg Ludwig
But yeah he had great relations and married a Flemish princess to increase English relations as she was descended from Alfred the great

>Eddie Izard
>caring about a transvestite champagne socialists thoughts

>a slum until the tudours
Which is why they were able to finance all those wars and subjugate the Scots, Aquitaine was good for little more than Bordeaux, Normandy just did more North Sea trade and they had plenty of Flemish settlers that helped

English doesn't have that use like the Slavic languages have with Bosnian and Bosniak for example

>franci
WOW YOU GOT ME THERE, nothing like a Frankish identity in 1066 no siree

Why are Irish dirtfuckers and French aristocrats of equal value

...

DELETE THIS

Aquitaine was the richest single duchy in Europe at the time. Normandy's power relied on the fact that it could muster upwards 1000 mounted knights.

The English kings used French as a court language, a good couple of them rarely set foot in England and some didn't even speak English. They used England to prop up their wars of conquest in France. This is generally true until Eddie Longshanks.

He's right. How come the French cannot win a war against England?
>Inb4 Normans are French

...

I give him a firm handshake and a hearty slap on the back.

The eternal anglo will reign forever.

kek I didn't know this was a thing

What are you babbling about ?

>franks
>1066
you're a bit late dude

>How do you respond?

"shutup Lloyd, you're talking bullshit again".