What If the Hundred Years' War Ended Differently?

The Actual History

The Hundred Years' War (1337-1453) stands as one of the most protracted and consequential conflicts in European history, fundamentally reshaping the political landscape of Western Europe and contributing significantly to the development of national identities in both England and France. Despite its name, the war actually lasted 116 years and consisted of several distinct phases of conflict interspersed with periods of uneasy peace.

The origins of the war lay in a complex web of dynastic claims, feudal relationships, and territorial disputes. The immediate trigger was the death of Charles IV of France in 1328 without a direct male heir. Edward III of England, as the son of Charles's sister Isabella, claimed the French throne. However, the French nobility, invoking Salic law (which prohibited succession through the female line), instead crowned Philip VI of Valois, Charles's cousin, as king. Initially, Edward accepted this arrangement and paid homage to Philip for his French territories, primarily Gascony in southwestern France. However, tensions escalated over Philip's confiscation of Gascony in 1337, prompting Edward to reassert his claim to the French throne and formally begin the war.

The first phase of the conflict (1337-1360) saw significant English victories, most notably at Crécy (1346) and Poitiers (1356), where English longbowmen proved devastatingly effective against French knights. These victories led to the Treaty of Brétigny (1360), which granted Edward full sovereignty over an expanded Aquitaine and other territories, though he renounced his claim to the French throne.

The second phase (1369-1389) began when Charles V of France renewed hostilities, exploiting the aging Edward III's diminished capacity and the unpopularity of the Black Prince's rule in Aquitaine. This period saw a reversal of fortunes, with the French recapturing most of the territories lost at Brétigny through careful strategy and avoiding pitched battles where English longbowmen excelled.

After another period of relative peace, the third and most dramatic phase began with Henry V of England's invasion of France in 1415. His stunning victory at Agincourt, where a numerically inferior English force defeated a much larger French army, reinvigorated English ambitions in France. Taking advantage of the civil war between the Burgundian and Armagnac factions in France, Henry secured the momentous Treaty of Troyes in 1420. This agreement disinherited the Dauphin (the future Charles VII) and recognized Henry as the heir to the French throne upon the death of the mentally unstable King Charles VI. Henry would marry Catherine, Charles VI's daughter, and their children would rule a dual monarchy of England and France.

This arrangement, which seemed to fulfill England's dynastic ambitions, was short-lived. Henry V died unexpectedly in 1422, just two months before Charles VI. This left Henry's infant son, Henry VI, as king of both England and France under the regency of his uncles. The English position in France initially remained strong under the leadership of the Duke of Bedford, who secured further victories and maintained the Anglo-Burgundian alliance.

The turning point came with the emergence of Joan of Arc in 1429. This peasant girl, claiming divine guidance, revitalized French morale and led the Dauphin's forces to lift the siege of Orléans. Though Joan was captured and executed by the English in 1431, her brief campaign marked the beginning of a French resurgence. The Dauphin was crowned Charles VII at Reims, the traditional coronation site of French kings, challenging the legitimacy of Henry VI's claim to the French throne.

The final phase of the war saw steady French advances. The Burgundians switched allegiance to Charles VII with the Treaty of Arras in 1435, severely weakening the English position. The development of effective French artillery under the Bureau brothers neutralized the advantage of English-held fortifications. By 1450, the English had been driven out of Normandy, and by 1453, they had lost all their continental possessions except for Calais (which they would hold until 1558).

The war transformed both kingdoms. In England, the cost of the war and the ultimate defeat contributed to political instability that would culminate in the Wars of the Roses (1455-1487). The conflict also accelerated the decline of feudalism and chivalric warfare, as the effectiveness of peasant longbowmen against mounted knights and the later importance of artillery and professional standing armies demonstrated the changing nature of warfare.

For France, the war was ultimately a unifying force. The conflict strengthened royal authority, as the crown took on the responsibility of defending the realm and developed new taxation systems to fund the war effort. The shared struggle against English occupation fostered a sense of French national identity that transcended feudal loyalties. The creation of a standing army under Charles VII laid the groundwork for France to emerge as the dominant continental power in the early modern period.

The Hundred Years' War also had broader European implications. It contributed to the development of more professional armies, advances in military technology and tactics, and the strengthening of state institutions needed to sustain prolonged warfare. The conflict helped shape the political geography of Western Europe, solidifying the separate identities of England and France after centuries of entanglement following the Norman Conquest of 1066.

By its conclusion in 1453 (coincidentally the same year as the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks, often used to mark the end of the Middle Ages), the Hundred Years' War had fundamentally altered the trajectory of European history, setting England and France on divergent paths that would define their development into the modern era.

The Point of Divergence

In this alternate timeline, the outcome of the Hundred Years' War takes a dramatically different turn, with England emerging victorious and maintaining control over significant French territory. The point of divergence occurs in the critical period between 1429 and 1435, when the historical tide of the war shifted decisively in France's favor.

Several plausible factors combine to create this alternate outcome:

First, let's imagine that Joan of Arc's campaign ends differently. Perhaps she is captured earlier, before the lifting of the siege of Orléans, or her initial victories are less decisive. Without the symbolic and strategic boost provided by Joan's successes, French morale remains low, and Charles VII (still the uncrowned Dauphin) struggles to rally support for his cause.

Second, the Duke of Bedford, regent for the young Henry VI in France, lives longer than his historical death in 1435. Bedford was a capable military and political leader whose death significantly weakened English governance in France. In this timeline, he survives another decade, providing crucial leadership and maintaining the Anglo-Burgundian alliance that was essential to English control in northern France.

Third, the Burgundian alliance holds firm. Historically, Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy abandoned his alliance with England and reconciled with Charles VII in the 1435 Treaty of Arras, a pivotal diplomatic reversal that undermined the English position. In our alternate timeline, perhaps the assassination of Philip's father, John the Fearless, by the Dauphin's supporters in 1419 remains an unforgivable act, or Bedford's diplomacy and military success convince Philip that his interests remain better served by the English connection.

Fourth, England avoids or better manages the domestic political instability that historically distracted from the war effort. Perhaps Henry VI, who historically suffered from periods of mental incapacity that paralyzed English governance, either has better mental health or has more effective regents who maintain focus on securing the French territories.

Finally, the development of French artillery, which historically neutralized the advantage of English fortifications in Normandy and Gascony, is delayed or less effective in this timeline. This allows English forces to maintain their defensive strongholds longer, giving them time to consolidate control over northern France.

By 1445 in this alternate timeline, the situation in France has stabilized in England's favor. Charles VII, unable to gain momentum after the failure of Joan of Arc's mission and facing continued Burgundian hostility, agrees to a modified version of the Treaty of Troyes. This new treaty recognizes Henry VI as King of France in the northern and western portions of the country, while Charles retains authority in the south and east as a subordinate ruler or as an independent king of a rump French state.

This arrangement creates a dual monarchy where the Kings of England rule directly over England, Normandy, Gascony, and parts of northern France including Paris, while maintaining suzerainty over Burgundy and other allied territories. The map of Western Europe is fundamentally redrawn, with profound implications for the future development of both England and France, as well as the broader European political landscape.

Immediate Aftermath

Political Reorganization

The English victory leads to a significant restructuring of political authority in France:

Dual Monarchy Establishment: Henry VI rules as King of England and France, though the two kingdoms remain distinct entities with separate laws, institutions, and parliaments. A regency council governs French territories, initially led by the Duke of Bedford and later by other English nobles with French holdings.
Territorial Divisions: Northern France, including Paris, Normandy, and the old English territories in Gascony, come under direct English control. Burgundy maintains significant autonomy as an English ally, controlling much of eastern France and the Low Countries. The rump French state under Charles VII (or his successor) controls territories south of the Loire River.
Feudal Reorganization: English supporters among the French nobility receive lands confiscated from those loyal to Charles VII, creating a new Anglo-French aristocracy with vested interests in maintaining the dual monarchy. This process mirrors the earlier Norman redistribution of land in England after 1066, but in reverse.

Military Developments

The conclusion of the main conflict leads to new military arrangements:

Garrison System: England establishes a network of garrisons throughout its French territories, particularly along the borders with the rump French state and other potentially hostile neighbors. These garrisons are staffed by a combination of English troops and local levies.
Standing Forces: The need to maintain control over newly conquered territories accelerates the development of permanent military forces rather than the feudal levies and short-term contract armies of earlier medieval warfare. This standing army becomes a significant institution in the dual monarchy.
Naval Expansion: Control of both sides of the English Channel necessitates an expanded naval presence to protect trade and communication between England and its continental possessions. The English fleet grows in size and capability, laying foundations for later maritime power.

Economic Integration and Disruption

The new political reality creates both opportunities and challenges economically:

Trade Networks: With control of major French ports like Bordeaux, Calais, and potentially Rouen and Harfleur, English merchants gain advantageous access to continental trade networks. The wool trade, vital to the English economy, benefits particularly from secure access to Flemish cloth-making centers through the Burgundian alliance.
Currency Issues: The question of currency in the dual monarchy creates administrative challenges. The English attempt to establish monetary stability across their territories, perhaps maintaining separate but linked currency systems for England and English France.
Agricultural Disruption: Years of warfare have severely damaged agricultural productivity in many regions of France. The new regime faces the immediate challenge of restoring food production and managing potential famines in war-ravaged areas.

Social and Cultural Tensions

The English victory creates complex social dynamics:

Elite Integration: A process of intermarriage and cultural exchange begins between English nobles and cooperative French aristocratic families, similar to what occurred after the Norman Conquest but in the opposite direction. English nobles increasingly adopt aspects of French courtly culture.
Popular Resistance: Despite the formal peace, passive resistance and occasional uprisings occur in English-controlled territories, particularly in regions with strong loyalty to Charles VII. The English authorities respond with a combination of repression and attempts to win local support through good governance and respect for local customs.
Linguistic Developments: The English ruling class in France, unlike the Normans in England who adopted English, largely maintains its linguistic identity while becoming increasingly bilingual. French remains the language of administration in English-controlled French territories, while English governance itself continues to use both languages.

Religious and Ecclesiastical Affairs

The church adapts to the new political reality:

Ecclesiastical Appointments: Control over ecclesiastical appointments becomes a significant aspect of English rule in France. The crown asserts its right to nominate bishops and abbots in its French territories, creating tensions with the papacy similar to those that existed in England.
University Politics: The University of Paris, one of Europe's intellectual centers, experiences political purges as scholars with loyalties to Charles VII are removed and replaced with those supportive of or at least accepting of English rule.
Conciliar Movement: The dual monarchy potentially takes different positions in the ongoing church politics of the era, particularly regarding the conciliar movement that sought to limit papal authority in favor of church councils.

Diplomatic Realignments

The new balance of power forces diplomatic adjustments throughout Europe:

Burgundian Prominence: The Duchy of Burgundy, as England's crucial continental ally, gains increased influence and potentially expands its territories at the expense of the rump French state. The Burgundian court becomes a major center of late medieval culture and power.
Scottish Recalculation: Scotland, traditionally allied with France against England (the "Auld Alliance"), must reconsider its strategic position. Without a strong independent France as a counterweight to England, Scotland faces increased pressure to accommodate its southern neighbor.
Imperial Relations: The Holy Roman Empire adjusts to having the Anglo-French dual monarchy as a western neighbor rather than a divided England and France. This potentially affects imperial politics, particularly regarding Burgundy, which holds territories that are technically imperial fiefs.

Long-term Impact

Political Evolution

The dual monarchy fundamentally reshapes the political development of Western Europe:

Governmental Innovations: Administering territories on both sides of the Channel requires institutional innovations. The English develop more sophisticated bureaucratic systems earlier than in our timeline, potentially including representative institutions that span both kingdoms while respecting their distinct legal traditions.
Different Absolutism: The trajectory toward royal absolutism that historically characterized France under Louis XIV takes a different path. The dual monarchy might develop a more mixed constitution, blending English parliamentary traditions with French administrative centralization, creating a unique political system unlike either historical England or France.
Burgundian Destiny: Burgundy, as England's key continental ally, potentially evolves into a major independent kingdom rather than being absorbed by France and the Habsburgs as occurred historically. This creates a third power in Western Europe, permanently altering the region's political geography.
Rump France: The southern French state either gradually declines in importance or develops a distinct Mediterranean-oriented identity, potentially forming closer ties with Aragon, Italy, or other southern European powers.

Military and Warfare Transformation

The English victory accelerates certain military developments while altering others:

Earlier Standing Armies: The need to maintain control over French territories leads to the earlier development of professional standing armies, potentially accelerating military innovations and changing the nature of European warfare sooner than in our timeline.
Naval Dominance: With control of both sides of the Channel and major Atlantic ports, the dual monarchy develops naval power earlier and more extensively than historical England alone. This potentially leads to earlier maritime exploration and colonial expansion.
Different Military Technology: The development of artillery and firearms follows a different trajectory. Without the historical French innovations in siege artillery that helped expel the English, gunpowder weapons might develop along different lines, perhaps with greater emphasis on field artillery or naval applications.
Altered Balance of Power: The existence of a powerful Anglo-French state changes the European balance of power, potentially leading to different alliance systems and patterns of conflict than those that historically shaped early modern Europe.

Economic and Commercial Developments

The economic integration of England with northern France creates new patterns of development:

Commercial Networks: London and Paris develop as twin capitals of a trading network that dominates northern European commerce. The wool-cloth trade between English sheep farmers and Flemish weavers operates within a single political sphere, potentially accelerating textile industry development.
Different Mercantilism: The economic theories that historically emerged in competing English and French systems develop differently. The dual monarchy might develop economic policies that blend aspects of both traditions, creating alternative models of state involvement in trade and industry.
Agricultural Exchange: English and French agricultural practices cross-pollinate more extensively, potentially leading to earlier agricultural improvements and innovations in both regions.
Colonial Competition: When the Age of Exploration begins, the dual monarchy potentially launches more powerful and better-financed expeditions than either historical England or France could alone. This might accelerate European colonial expansion or change its patterns significantly.

Cultural and Intellectual Fusion

The sustained political union creates deeper cultural exchanges:

Renaissance Influences: The English connection to France provides more direct access to Renaissance ideas flowing from Italy. This potentially accelerates the adoption of Renaissance art, architecture, and humanism in England while creating unique Anglo-French cultural expressions.
Literary Developments: English literature develops differently with sustained French influence. Chaucer's successors might continue using French literary models more extensively, while French literature incorporates more English elements, creating distinctive literary traditions unlike those that historically emerged.
University Exchange: Greater integration between Oxford, Cambridge, and the University of Paris creates a more unified intellectual sphere in Northern Europe. This potentially affects the development of science, philosophy, and theology, creating different intellectual traditions than those that historically emerged.
Architectural Fusion: English Gothic architecture continues to develop in dialogue with French styles rather than evolving into the distinctive Perpendicular Gothic that historically emerged. This creates a more integrated architectural tradition across the dual monarchy.

Religious Reformation

The religious upheavals of the 16th century unfold differently:

Different English Reformation: Henry VIII's historical break with Rome was partly motivated by his desire for greater national sovereignty. In a timeline where England already rules significant continental territories, the impetus and nature of any English religious reformation would be fundamentally different.
Alternative Protestant Development: If a reformation movement still emerges in Germany, its spread follows different patterns. The dual monarchy might resist Protestant ideas more effectively than France historically did, or alternatively, might embrace certain reformed ideas while maintaining a unique ecclesiastical structure.
Religious Wars Reconfigured: The Wars of Religion that devastated France in the 16th century would take very different forms in this timeline. Religious conflicts might occur along different geographical and political lines, potentially with three-way conflicts between Catholics, Protestants, and adherents of a unique Anglo-French church.

National Identity Formation

The sustained union fundamentally alters the development of national identities:

Blended Elites: Over generations, the aristocracies of England and northern France blend through intermarriage and shared court culture, creating a unique Anglo-French elite identity that differs from both historical English and French noble cultures.
Popular Identities: At the popular level, English and French identities likely remain more distinct, with language differences persisting. However, increased trade and movement between the regions gradually creates more cultural exchange than historically occurred.
Different Nationalism: When nationalist ideologies emerge in the 18th and 19th centuries, they take very different forms in this timeline. The concept of the nation-state might develop along regional rather than historical national lines, or emphasize dynastic loyalty over linguistic or cultural unity.
Legacy Identities: Modern national identities in this timeline would be unrecognizable compared to our own. The very concepts of "England," "France," and "Britain" would carry entirely different meanings and associations.

Global Historical Implications

The existence of an Anglo-French dual monarchy has profound implications for world history:

Colonial Empire: With the resources of both England and northern France, plus likely Burgundian cooperation, the dual monarchy potentially builds a larger and earlier colonial empire than either historical power achieved alone. This changes patterns of colonization in the Americas, Africa, and Asia.
Different Seven Years' War: The global conflict that historically established British colonial dominance at France's expense never occurs in this form. Instead, different global rivalries emerge, perhaps between the Anglo-French monarchy and Spain, Portugal, or other colonial powers.
Alternative American Development: Colonial North America develops very differently without the historical Anglo-French imperial rivalry. The thirteen colonies that became the United States might never form in the same way, and Quebec would not be a French island in a British colonial sea.
Industrial Revolution Reconfigured: The Industrial Revolution, historically centered in England, might develop earlier with access to additional French resources and markets, or might emerge in different regions and sectors than it historically did.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Eleanor Matthews, Professor of Medieval English History at Oxford University, suggests:

"The survival of the dual monarchy would have fundamentally transformed English political development. England's historical path toward parliamentary government was shaped by its island status and the relative weakness of the monarchy compared to continental powers. A successful Lancastrian dual monarchy would have created a very different dynamic. English kings with substantial French territories and resources might have developed more authoritarian tendencies, similar to those of historical French monarchs. Conversely, the practical challenges of governing territories separated by the Channel might have necessitated greater delegation of authority and more sophisticated representative institutions. The English Parliament might have evolved into something resembling an imperial diet, with representatives from both kingdoms negotiating their respective contributions to common enterprises. This would have created a political system unlike anything in our history—neither the centralized absolutism of historical France nor the parliamentary monarchy of historical England, but a hybrid system with its own unique characteristics and tensions."

Professor Jean-Pierre Dubois, historian of medieval France at the Sorbonne, notes:

"For France, English victory would have meant the interruption of the centralization process that historically defined French state development. Northern France under English rule and southern France under the diminished Valois would have developed increasingly distinct identities and institutions. The north would have experienced greater English influence in law, governance, and possibly language, while the south might have developed closer ties to Mediterranean powers like Aragon and Italy. This division might have eventually resembled the historical division between northern and southern Netherlands after the Dutch Revolt, with two increasingly different societies emerging from a formerly unified culture. The very concept of 'France' as we understand it—a centralized nation-state with Paris as its undisputed capital—might never have formed. Instead, regional identities like Normandy, Burgundy, Aquitaine, and Languedoc might have remained primary, creating a more regionally diverse Western European culture. Paris itself, while still important, might have become more like Brussels—a city with dual identity, both a regional capital and an administrative center for a larger political entity it does not fully belong to culturally."

Dr. Richard Montgomery, expert in medieval military history at the University of Edinburgh, observes:

"The military implications of an English victory would have extended far beyond the immediate aftermath. The dual monarchy would have faced the fundamental challenge of being a cross-Channel state in an age of limited communications. This would have necessitated significant innovations in military organization, logistics, and command structures. We might have seen the earlier development of specialized military bureaucracies, standing armies, and naval forces dedicated to maintaining the crucial Channel link. When gunpowder weapons transformed warfare in the 15th and 16th centuries, the dual monarchy would have had both the resources and the motivation to lead these innovations rather than merely respond to them. With threats potentially coming from multiple directions—the continent, the British Isles, and eventually overseas—the military would have evolved differently than either the historically land-focused French military or the eventually sea-focused English forces. This might have produced a more balanced military tradition that excelled in both land and naval warfare earlier than any historical European power managed to do."