Warfare In The Hundred Years War

Literature of the Middle Ages can not be discussed without acknowledging the undeniable importance of chivalry. Chivalry in relation to the middle ages is defined as “the code of conduct adhered to by Medieval knights with gallant knightly values including honor, bravery, courteousness and honesty.” This key characteristic is essential in defining an ideal knight as well as his expectations. A knight must live by a chivalric code in which he becomes indebted to the people, his fellow knights, and most importantly, his lord. No other knight displayed more of a devotion to upholding the code then Lanval of Marie de France’s lai “Lanval.” Lanval demonstrates his chivalric nature in essential every action from maintaining comitatus amongst the

In two stories there is a code that knights follow. Chivalry is the code that they follow. The code says that a knight should be a brave warrior, a good christian, and selflessly fighting for justice. The knights are supposed to fight for their king and queen. In the stories Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and from Morte d’Arthur they show the idea about chivalry.

There are many misunderstandings with the word chivalry, one of them being that the knight never actually swore an oath of chivalry until later in the middle ages. Chivalry was a word that was created by French-speaking English nobility, during the medieval period. The word originates from the French word cheval meaning horse, and the French word Knecht meant knight, by putting the two words together, we get the word chevalier which meant horseman. During the early medieval ages, a knight was known as a chevalerie which meant horseman. Then the lords, who ruled over the

In the Medieval Period, knights dedicated their lives to following the code of chivalry. In Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, a number of characters performed chivalrous acts to achieve the status of an ideal knight. Their characteristics of respect for women and courtesy for all, helpfulness to the weak, honor, and skill in battle made the characters King Arthur, King Pellinore, and Sir Gryfflette examples of a what knights strove to be like in Medieval society. Because of the examples ofchivalry, Le Morte d’Arthur showed what a knight desired to be, so he could improve theworld in which he lived.

Knights are one of the most mistaken figures of the medieval era due to fairytales and over exaggerated fiction novels. When medieval knights roamed the earth, it was known that they were only human and, like humans, had faults. These knights did not always live up to the standards designated by society. However, in The Canterbury Tales, the knight is revealed as a character that would now be considered a knight in shining armor, a perfect role model in how he acts and what he does. Modern day people see them as chivalrous figures instead of their actual role as mounted cavalry soldiers. As time passes, the idea of what a knight is changes from a simple cavalry soldier to a specific type of behavior.

     An act of chivalry is described as the qualifications or character of the ideal knight. Knights were expected to uphold this code of conduct. In the English literature Le Morte d?Arthur, French for ?The Death of Arthur?, by Sir Thomas Malory, the characters display acts of chivalry from beginning to end. Though the code of chivalry contains many qualities or acts, nevertheless bravery, loyalty, and courtly love are demonstrated more throughout this literature.

The Hundred Years War was a pivotal moment in the relationship of England and France. The war caused trouble for both countries and their allies. France was even lead by Joan of Arc. Both countries suffered because of the long, drawn out war. They also had benefits.

In??Sir Gawain and The Green Knight?,?the author portrays the nature and code of chivalry as well as the humanistic features of the knights. Knights were but an extension of the king. They were not allowed to do inappropriate things as they were considered the representatives of Arthur. They were meant to treat women appropriately. Chivalry was their main feature.

The 100 Years’ War was given a misleading name, as this conflict between England and France was not a war that lasted one hundred years, it was rather a series of related clashes that lasted just over a century. However, the fact that this conflict lasted more that one hundred years meant that many new tactics and weaponry came into play that changed the concepts of warfare forever. During this one hundred years, tactics changed from the system of feudal armies dominated by heavy Calvary, to the first attempt at some sort of ‘standing army’. The evolution in the types of tactics and weapons that nations used caused the battlefields of Europe to be covered in blood, as the more advanced the weapons, became, the more casualties amounted. The 100 Years’ War was the first time that strategy was used in order to command troops on the battlefield, and it was during this time that the fabrication of early martial handbooks also came into the battle. One of the more famous authors of one of these books was “the great Swabian practitioner and teacher, Johannes Liechtenauer” . Unfortunately, there are no French texts concerning martial handbooks that predate 1570, meaning that in order to look at tactics, sources from surrounding nations at the time have to suffice. Another thing that evolved extremely rapidly during the 100 years’ war, was the escalation of the types of weapons used during conflicts. Inasmuch there were 100 years of outright fighting, each side had a chance to

It is largely acknowledged by historians that, while it is difficult to be definitive in the meaning of chivalry-with Maurice Keen believing it to be a ‘word elusive of definition’- it came to denote the culture of a martial estate which ‘regarded war as its hereditary profession’. Thus, it could be considered that the violence of war had large implications on what people began to perceive to be chivalry. Additionally, the focus on violence- such as the participating in tournaments and jousts- further emphasises the close link between carrying out violent acts and the idea that a knight was being chivalrous.

In the Medieval times a sword was a knight’s most important weapons. The fact was found on this website: http://medievalweaponsrds.weebly.com/fun-facts.html. In Medieval times, the armor would vary with leather, chain mail, and plate armor, all coming as technology advanced and blacksmith’s skill increased. Over the Medieval period, weapons were advancing and the elegant rapier began to be obsolete as the musket became popular. A battle was brewing during these times with Queen Elizabeth just trying to survive the war and King Phillip trying to take over England. The advancement of armor, that was made different throughout the Middle Ages, and having a variety of weapons gave England an advantage against the Spanish in Battle.

The next major battle that occurred during the Hundred Year War was the Battle of Poitiers. The Battle of Poitiers was a battle that occurred after a six year break from war, warfare broke out again as Edward III’s son, Edward the Black Prince had attacked France in 1356. The French had a line of defense, however Edward was able to break through the defenses and attacked the French head on. The current king of France was King John II. Edward the Black Prince was able to cause a disastrous battle in France and the result of the battle was that Edward the Black Prince was able to capture King John II (Jean II) as well as almost 2,000 aristocracy members of France. Edward the Black Prince wanted a ransom. France was at a loss without their king and did not know what to do so they signed the Treaty of Bretigny in 1360 that states that they would cede a large amount of northern territory and the shoreline to England. In exchange for this deal, Edward the Black Prince was required to give up his claim to the throne. After the loss of the two great generals of England, Edward III and Edward the Black Prince, the French regained control of most parts of France and in 1389 the two sides signed a true as well as extended the treaty in 1396 for 28 years. In 1964, The Battle of Auray was the battle where the English forces under John Chandos besieged Auray and the leader of the French army, Bertrand du Guesclin, was captured. During this time, the French King known as King Jean II died

The Hundred Years War was the last great medieval war. It was a war not just between Kings, but lesser nobles were also able to pursue their own personal agendas while participating in the larger conflict. Future wars saw far less factionalism, at least on the scale found in medieval conflicts. The Hundred Years War was actually dozens of little wars and hundreds of battles and sieges that went on for over a century until both sides were exhausted. While neither side won in any real sense, the end result was that while there were two kingdoms at the

Chivalry is a concept that has baffled countless medieval historians throughout the years. Chivalry was supposedly a code that knights and nobles lived their lives by, however, like other social structures of the past historians have debated over the extent to which people lived according to chivalric principles. Sir Walter Scott believed that chivalry was meant as a code which knights could aspire, but not one that was carried out in reality. His description seems accurate. Chivalric principles could not be borne out in real life. Froissart painted a romantic image of The Hundred Years War and of the aristocracy at the time. Froissart is constantly full of praise for the chivalric lifestyle many of them are

Chivalry as a concept is something that has baffled many medieval historians over the years. Chivalry was supposing a code that knights and nobles were to live their lives by however like many social structures of the past historians have debated over what exactly chivalry was. According to Sir Walter Scott chivalry was meant to be a code which knights could aspire to not necessarily carry out. His description does seem to be accurate. Chivalric principles could not be carried out in real life. Froissart’s image of The Hundred Years War are romanticised in such a way that the historian must be careful not to take a lot of the text too seriously. Perhaps we should forgive Froissart for this, compared to modern standards his accuracy would fall short simply given the time he lived in. His accounts often came from supposed eyewitnesses that would of course have manipulated their accounts to suit themselves. Therefore when reading Froissart’s Chronicles and concluding whether or not his accounts are accurate one must take caution and remember the purpose of his writings and who he is working for when completing them.