Why did France end up winning the Hundred Years War despite England

>>3111195
Because England only won during the first part of the war
After one point, England kept getting inflicted humiliating defeats (Patay, Formigny, Gerberoy...etc) until the decive one, Castillon, that ended the war in France's favor

>>3111195
What battles did the english won besides meme victories like Crecy?

File: IMG_3939.jpg (104KB, 720x616px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 720x616px

>>3111195
>implying spending 100 years trolling the French before strategically retreating counts as a loss.

>>3111212
>Agincourt
>Siege of Calais (Important because Calais was a pain the ass for the French and went on to be England's only territory in France for years)
>Poitiers
>Verneuil

because you are a dumb Nigel who stops reading something that doesnt support his idea

England wasn't even part of the Hundred Years War, it just got used as a source of cannon fodder by the counts of Anjou.

Sadly, being English, those soldiers were no match for a French teenaged peasant girl.

>>3111195

Henry V died. Then his son became king at the grand old age of 9 months old. While he was a child his advisors ran the country and the war effort, but where too busy stabbing each other in the back to do a good job. As an adult he was fairly weak willed and just went with what his advisors and then his wife told him (even though they were still backstabbing each other). Then Normandy was lost and he had a complete mental breakdown. After that his advisors and subordinates were all too busy openly fighting each other in the Wars of the Roses to bother trying to take it back. Edward IV gathered up an army and invaded in the 1470s but there was no fighting and the two sides agreed to not bother in return for a large personal bribe to Edward (basically "I'll give you 100 ducats to fuck off").

No one seemed to care after that apart from Henry VIII who just faffed around for a bit.

>>3111268

>it's a "the plantagenets were literally French, 300 years after the conquest" episode

File: worst fear of the anglo.jpg (954KB, 770x1062px) Image search: [Google]

954KB, 770x1062px

Anglos fear the French maiden.

>>3111281

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

Hmmmm....

>>3111276
>it's a "bongs deny reality because they can't come to terms with their history of utter cuckdness" episode

>>3111276
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.

>>3111297
Give me 4 times England got conquered by French people

>>3111297

>England conquered by France in 1327

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

>>3111292

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

>>3111233
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.

>>3111305
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.

>>3111329

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

>>3111195
>french civil war
>why did the french win

???

>>3111317
lol what

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

>>3111328
Yes because being born in a stable makes you a horse.

>>3111337
Eternal Anglo BTFO'd

File: 0d6683664beac15c0afcd64a6f582d4db13a88eaced5a254d630aade73e5b850[1].jpg (55KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1280x720px

>>3111337
delet this

>>3111329
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.

>>3111343

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.

>>3111337

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'

>>3111361
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".

>>3111195
Why do working class plebshits concern themselves with a dispute between the European aristocracy like it had anything to do with them personally?

>>3111383

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

>>3111337
>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

>>3111388
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.

>>3111393
>i-it doesn't count because the English surrendered too quickly!

Interesting argument.

>>3111398
>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

>>3111403
>surrender to every enemy immediately, that way we never lose!

English military doctrine everyone.

>>3111407
>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.

>>3111407
Really? Reminds me of French doctrine, only a lot more recently.

>>3111412
I just enjoy rekking the shit out of you, but at this point I should probably do what France eventually did as told here: >>3111337

>>3111419
ok pal

>>3111398
>>3111407

>English

But they were literally French 5 minutes ago?

>>3111386
But that's most of history...

>>3111337
>the French just felt sorry for them and decided to leave them alone

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

>>3111424
French nobles, sadly having to rely on tragically inferior English soldiers.

File: 7400f9cdb156a07a30912b3ff59085599d1c2476_hq.jpg (132KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1024x1024px

>>3111195
Because French army was led by a woman, and woman is stronker than man.

>>3112057

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

File: IMG_0852.jpg (92KB, 720x616px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 720x616px

>>3111393
Stop with this revisionism Anglo

>>3111233

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

>>3112170
There's only so much you can do with what you're given.

>>3112438
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.

>>3111289
>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?

>>3112579
That's funny, since the English King defeated the french at agincourt then cucked the French king by marrying his daughter.

>>3112591
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.

>>3112606

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

>>3112579

>Let the boy win his spurs.

What did he mean by this?

>>3112619
cuuuuuuuck

>>3111195

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

>>3112579
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.

>>3111337
the eternal anglo on suicide watch

>>3112411
the fourth stage is true tho

>>3111337
>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.

>>3111195

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 /his/ have any recommendations for reading on the period? France/Scot relations, books on the Independence Wars, etc?

>>3112580
>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.

>>3112150
>woman is stronker than man.
Tits or GTFO.

>>3112688

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.

>>3112688
Not a single one of those things is even remotely true, you don't even get points for effort.

File: touchecoule.png (14KB, 382x414px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 382x414px

>>3111337

>>3112712

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?

>>3112725
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?

>>3112744

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.

>>3112764
The Norman ruling nobility didn't speak 'english' when they started speaking it everyone was surprised

Artillery and Catholicism.

>>3112764
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".

>>3112778
Joan of Arc was raped

>>3112778

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

>>3112781
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.

>>3112781
No she wasn't, if she had she obviously would have said so during the trial.

>>3112793
>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.

>>3112826

>>3112826

>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.

>>3112856
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.

>>3112881

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.

>>3112933

>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.

>>3112953

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?

File: 1498673931552.gif (2MB, 320x242px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x242px

>>3112653
>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

>>3112411
It's all true. Stay salty

>>3112579
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

>>3113094
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

File: 1499612019375.jpg (281KB, 1419x879px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1419x879px

>>3113123
we've cucked virtually every country on the planet at this point, comes with the territory

>>3112579
English kings were far more martial than French kings actually

>>3113094
There's a lot of psychological analysis to be made from this post.

>>3113102
Of course it's true. France seized the British crown numerous times

>>3113277

Examples please.

>>3113277
Nigga I may not like you, but I do like your digits.
11 and 77 are signs of the coming prophet

>>3113304
>>3111337

>>3111195
>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.

>>3113333
the only successful one on that list was William the Bastard, and he wasn't even French

>>3113014
Nigger the local nobility was completely replaced.

>>3113102
>>3113173
top fucking kek

When's the last time an English king was anywhere near a battlefield?

>>3113349
nah they mixed with the Saxons, Welsh and Scottish nobility

>>3113123
To people as hopelessly delusional as bongs, any statement of factual history apparently seems like a personal attack.

You should blame your brainwashing, not history.

>>3113348
Wrong.

>>3113363
Then surely there would be present day noble houses that descend from Saxons.

OH WAIT THERE ISN'T A SINGLE ONE

>>3113123
Imperialism favours the imperialists, not the conquered. Sure you get some semblance of administration and a sport or two, but millions of deaths and oppression usually isn't what people want. And when you say Anti-Britain, you mean the state right? So who gives a shit? We're all independent of the identity of the state unless you want to be aligned to the queen and shitlords in parliament.

>>3113358
Elizabeth II served in women's branch of the British army in WW2

File: IMG_0735.jpg (85KB, 634x587px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 634x587px

>>3113381
LMAO, remember the last Saxon king?
Edward the Confessor? Kek

>>3113381
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Noble_families_of_the_United_Kingdom
several are Anglo-Saxon in origin

>>3113376

You aren't trying to say he was French are you? His ancestors were Vikings. That means he's litterally a viking. A dog born in a stable isn't a horse afterall.

>>3113499
I would agree that the Normans were Viking in origin. But they did adopt a lot of French culture. I think its more of a dog that wants to resemble a horse and over generation, becomes a horse through cross-breeding.

>>3113499
You do know that William was speaking french, that he was the first duke of Normandy who practiced polygamy, and that he conquered england with an army made of nobles from the whole country while at the battle of Hastings a frog was autistically screeching "La Chanson de Roland" to encourage the anglo-french coalition ?
Why is it that the brits have such an inferiority complex toward claiming that the medieval nobility of England wasn't french ? They were french, they lived most of their time in France, they were scorning the english as peasants and servants. If anything, the english people should be more proud of their commons and the moment where their national identity surfaced (Right after the HYW) than when they were seen as garbage by pompeous frogs.

>>3113568

Don't look at me, talk to this guy >>3111343

>>3113393
pffffffhahahahahahahahahahaaahahaha

File: image.png (116KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 800x533px

>>3112647
And still being mad about Alsace-Moselle...

>>3113442
Literally name one.

Like I said, there's not a single English ducal house with the sole exception of the dukes of Wellington (who is only assumed to be English for that matter).

>>3113499
The Frenchman who conquered England was French, as were the other three French people who conquered England.

Don't you find it at least a little embarrassing that you're so buttblasted by your own history that you expend this much energy trying to deny it?

>>3113584
Are you retarded? William was a French-speaking Frenchman with 31/32 French ancestry. He's probably ten times more French than you are whatever the hell you think you are.

>>3113634
are you stupid? separate the ones with Norman names and Anglo-Saxon names

>>3113684

None of that matters. If the kings of England are still French 300 years after the Conquest, then William is still a Viking, 100 years after Rollo conquered Normandy. You can't have it both ways.

>>3113641
>>3113684
>>3113568
Nope

William's paternal grandmother was Breton, his paternal grandfather was Norman, Norman as in a great-grandson of Rollo, who only conquered Normandy 100 years ago

Williams paternal side wasn't French at all, ironically his peasant mother was

File: 1499190571176.png (7KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 420x420px

Monitoring this thread

>>3111195

A combination of the french getting over their hatred of the idea of non-noble armies, and a sucession of really bad english kings

>>3113712
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dukes_in_the_peerages_of_Britain_and_Ireland

>Duke of Cornwall
Held by the Prince of Wales.

>Duke of Norfolk
Originally de Mowbray, previously named d'Aubigny, after a town in Northern France (not even in Normandy)

>Duke of Somerset
Currently held by the Seymour family (previously Beaufort). Seymour is a deformation of Saint-Maur, either Saint-Maur-des-Fossés in Seine or Saint-Maur-sur-Loire in Touraine (again not even in Normandy)

>Duke of Richmond and Gordon
Held by the Lennox family, created for a bastard of Charles II with a Breton woman. So let's call that Scottish.

>Duke of Grafton
Held by the FitzRoy family (which is from the French "fils du roy" btw, which means son of the king), another bastard of Charles II

>Duke of Beaufort
Held by the Somerset family, originally named Beaufort, after Montmorency-Beaufort in Champagne. They descent from Edward III, who was of course an Angevin (again French but not even Norman).

>Duke of St Albans
Held by the Beauclerk family, created for yet another bastard of Charles II.

>Duke of Bedford
Held by the Russell family, from the old French Rousel, meaning redhaired.

>Duke of Devonshire
Held by the Cavendish family, descendant from Robert de Gernon who came from Normandy.

>Duke of Marlborough
Held by the Spencer-Churchill family. Spencer are a cadet branch of the Le Despencer family, itself descendant from the De Albetot family from Normandy. For good measure, Churchill is derived from De Courcil, also from Normandy.

>Duke of Rutland
Held by the Manners family, whose name is derived from Mesnières in Normandy.

>Duke of Hamilton
>Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry
>Duke of Argyll
>Duke of Atholl
>Duke of Montrose
>Duke of Roxburghe
These are all Scottish.

>Duke of Manchester
Held by the Montagu family, from Montaigu (French for "steep hill") in Manche in Normandy.

>Duke of Northumberland
Held by the Percy family, from Percy in Normandy.

>>3113752
>Norman as in a great-grandson of Rollo

William was six generations after Rollo
And given that even Rollo's direct son was already 50% French through his mom, I let you imagine how French William's father was 5 generations of interbreeding later...

>>3113965
>>3113712

>Duke of Leinster
>Duke of Abercorn
These are Irish.

>Duke of Wellington
Held by the Wellesley family, the single English family on thist list (well, Anglo-Irish which according to your logic would make them Irish).

>Duke of Sutherland
Held by the Egerton family, descendant of William le Belward (or Beluard), a Norman.

>Duke of Westminster
Held by the Grosvernor family, descendant from Hugh le Grand Veneur (French for "Master Huntsman"), who came from Normandy with William.

>Duke of Fife
Held by the Carnegie family, Scottish.

>Duke of Gloucester
>Duke of Kent
>Duke of Edinburgh
>Duke of York
>Duke of Cambridge
Held by the royal family.


So to recap, out of all the British ducal titles, setting aside the 7 Scottish ones, the 2 Irish ones, and the 6 that are held by the (German) royal family, that leaves 15 titles held by real noble families and that pertain to England. Out of those:
- 3 are held by descendants of bastards of a Stuart (Scottish) king
- 1 is held by an English family
- 11 are held by French families

>>3113752
31 of William's 32 great-great-great-grandparents were French. His only Viking ancestor is Rollo.

>>3113745
>if a Frenchman is French, then a Frenchman is Viking, hurr durr derp durrrr

Yes we get it, you're very stupid.

>>3113975
his grandmother was Breton and nobody knows anything the mother's side of his family aside from them being Norman peasants

maybe this hard for some people to understand but the concept of Frenchness was still pretty new in 1066 and mostly confined to the Isle de France region. Normans, Bretons, Flemish, Occitans etc were not French in a ethnically, linguistically or culturally. They were only vassals of the Kingdom of France and the concept of a centralised French nation didn't come about until centuries later. The Duchy of Normany in particular was practically an independent state in 1066.

William didn't consider himself French, neither do serious historians.

>>3113965
>>3113971
You'd think that it would take tremendous brainwashing and lying to keep the English populace from realising they're essentially living in a French-ruled apartheid state.

But then again judging by the bong posts ITT, those idiots are so desperate to keep submitting to their French overlords that they'll plainly refuse to accept the truth even when it's spelled out for them, so desperate they are to deny the humiliation it implies.

>>3114012
you like a projecting American

>>3114011
Being French meant being part of the kingdom of France. All those people were French. Additionally they were also culturally French on top of that. And they considered themselves French, as they literally call themselves that on the Bayeux tapestry.

Nobody ever said anything about a "centralised nation-state" or whatever desperate goalpost shifting mental acrobatics you're pulling out of your ass.

>>3114017
Americans aren't living under the rule of their most hated enemies all while desperately pretending they aren't.

lmao the more I think about this the more I realize how much of a joke your people are.

>>3114024
>>3114028
this is pretty sad desu lads, it's like you can't get over being a British colony and keep going back to this "BUT MUH NORMANS"

>>3114011
>William didn't consider himself French, neither do serious historians.
That's probably true. But he did consider his duchy as part of the french kingdom, he did speak french. For an outsider, the Normans were quite clearly "Franks", as the muslims identified them during the crusades.

Witchcraft.

>>3114045
yeah and Wales was part of the Kingdom of England and they didn't consider themselves English, same with Britanny, Flanders in the Kingdom of France etc

Medieval Kingdoms were not these homogeneous states that autists on /int/ like to believe

btw Norman French was pretty different to the Parisian French

>>3114061
>btw Norman French was pretty different to the Parisian French
Different sure...but not really a different language. Hence why english is full of french words. Are you even trying to deny that?

>>3114034
I hate to see what the news will do to your psyche, but you lost America along with the rest of your empire centuries ago. Your delusional clinging to the past is absolutely pathetic but understandable I suppose, since you have literally nothing else.

Because you see Americans had the balls to stand up and take their country back. While you total cucks are still bowing to your French overlords after 1000 fucking years, still licking their boots while desperately covering your eyes and ears pretending not to realize that the cock up your ass is that of a snail-slurping laughing Frenchman.

>>3114061

>Medieval Kingdoms were not these homogeneous states
Nobody but you ever said or implied that.

>Norman French was pretty different to the Parisian French
No it wasn't. It was the exact same language with a handful of extra loanwords. In fact it was closer to "Parisian" French than the dialects spoken in 90% of France.

>>3114067
It was, as was Walloon and Picard

Languages weren't codified back then, there were far more of them due to geography and lack of education

>>3114075
nobody cares what you think m8, professional linguists consider it a separate language

>>3114080
It's sad that you think you're being smart by uttering such platitudes.

The "Anglo-Norman" spoken by the nobility of England was literally just French. The texts written in England in that era are literally exactly Old French. Which is why they had zero trouble communicating with the French nobility, which for all intents and purposes they belonged to.

>>3114098
Tell us the truth, are you fucking crying right now?

You've stooped to denying the easily verifiable fact that Norman French is a dialect of standard French, because you are this anally ravaged about your country's history.

>>3114105
>Which is why they had zero trouble communicating with the French nobility, which for all intents and purposes they belonged to.
yeah and? English nobles had no problem communicating with Scottish nobles who spoke Scots

>>3114115
No I'm just laughing because your understanding of history is kindergarten level in thinking that vassals like Britanny and Normandy were French in 1066 (they were barely even vassals desu)

>>3114136

>English nobles had no problem communicating with Scottish nobles who spoke Scots
lol and guess what language they communicated in? French.

>understanding of history is kindergarten level in thinking
>get rekt so hard in your France vs England shit thread that you have to resort to claiming countries didn't even exist back then after all

I don't think I've ever seen anyone lose a thread this hard lmao

Anyway I'm out, if anyone else wants to use this idiotically delusional and hilariously butthurt bong as his pinata be my guest.

>>3114158
>>3114166
I feel sorry for you m8, you got rekt so hard you left the thread

>>3111195
reminder that Britain is the only remaining bastion of roman power, continentals are germanic rape-babies.

>>3114179

>anglo saxons aren't germanic

>>3111429
The reality : England was too weak
>>3112411
Real frenchies hate the terror and miss the Kingdom.

>>3114179
>literally a germanic nation

>>3112688
>>3112704
>anglo-normand

In other words, a frenchman.

>>3112591
>English

You mean French?

>>3111337
How will the anglo EVER recover?

Daily reminder the king of England paid homage to the king of France, making England just a sub-kingdom of the Royaume de France.

>>3113091
Still more than you.

>>3113348
If he's not french, then bretons, corsicans, alsatians, lorrains or occitans are not french

>>3114187
Celto-Germanic rapebabies

>>3114200
Germanic language raped by French

>>3113978

The English in the HYW are actually French, after 300 years of intermarriage and adoption of English language and culture, because their ancestors in 1066 were French, correct? That is your claim?

So if that is the case, then by exactly the same standards, the same Normans in 1066 are actually Vikings, despite 100 years of intermarriage and adoption of French culture and language, because their ancestors in 876 were Vikings.

>>3114305
You compare situations that are completly different. The Normans assimilated extremely fast. They arrived on a new land, adopted the religion and culture of the land they were given. On 1066, there are basically no traces of viking heritage.
But even after conquering England, these Normans thought Normandy was their home, kept speaking french and imposed their culture on the land they conquered.
There are only a few words of nordic origin in french, but a ton of french words in english.

>>3112411
>1153
Some how a bunch of Frogs fighting amongst themselves is the Anglos losing.

Matilda was Henry I's daughter and Stephens' cousin.

File: 170px-King_Richard_III.jpg (18KB, 170x239px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 170x239px

>>3113358
Richard III was the last English King who fought on a battlefield.

>>3114209
>'We shall be a lily-livered lot if we do not now take revenge on those who have come from France to take for themselves the lands of our men, thinking to inherit the same.'

Somehow I don't think he considered himself French

>>3114356
He was obviously in denial.

>>3111195
Treaty of Arras

>>3114305
Seems to me like England is intregrated with European culture, almost like a political and cultural union would be a natural progression lol

>>3111393
william wasn't french though...

>>3113358

If I recall rightly king George VI was on a naval vessel that fought at Jutland, and Edward VIII also got pretty close to the battlefield.

Obviously neither were kings AT THE TIME but I think it counts.

heres a question (no memes please)

so after all the initial battles and the Black Prince murdering loads of peasants, how the fuck did local dukes not capitulate due to a lack of men alive who could fight? The death tolls for the French were huge weren't they? Not just from the battles but the looting/pillaging

Why didn't enough Lords rebel against their King? Surely at the time it must have been tempting to switch your hand and side with the Invaders, especially in Feudal France where you're never really best pals with the King

>>3114424
How is he not french, exactly? Because 'muh his ancestors were not from France'?

>>3114502
The Normans weren't exactly best friends with the French, and they literally weren't from France

>>3114502
uh yeah thats kinda how it works, but im out ive seen the autism in this bread and off the charts

>>3114496
>The death tolls for the French were huge weren't they?

You seem to forget France was the most populated country in Europe.

>>3114510
>The Normans weren't exactly best friends with the French

Scots or Wales are not best friends with the englishmen, yet they're brits.

>they literally weren't from France

yea, the first ones...

>>3114517
I guess Englishmen are not really brits, then...

That bretons, lorrains, alsatians, corsicans, occitans or savoyards are not french...

I fucked French girls with my big English cock, they love it

>>3114532
You can be of a tribe and have more allegiance to that tribe than to some arbitrary borders drawn on a map. What exactly is "French" ethnicity? You could have the Franks claiming to be the true French I guess. But the tribal system in Europe has been replaced with the national system.
But to single two out aren't the Bretons from the England? If this was like Africa and people were still divided along tribal lines I could see them and specifically the Corsicans, being French only because they lived with in the borders of France.

>>3114606
even in 2017 there isn't technically a French ethnicity, French people don't exist according to the government of France kek

>>3114071
Imagine being this assblasted

>>3114611
I just read that. French does not collect ethnicity information on its census.

>>3114606
>What exactly is "French" ethnicity?

gauls or franks, I guess

France has a pretty glorious history to be fair. Shame they're totally done for.

File: 57868689979.png (120KB, 270x270px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 270x270px

>>3114630
>Franks
<French

>>3114666
inb4 pannonianon

>>3114175
You're not fooling anyone you sad fuck.

>>3114349
The last French ruler who fought on a battlefield was Napoleon III.

Feel the difference.

>>3114762

And no, >>3114434 doesn't count, by those standards the last French leader to have fought on a battlefield was Jacques Chirac.

File: smug finn.jpg (54KB, 452x570px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 452x570px

>>3114577
>big English cock

>>3114776
>finn
Asians have tiny penises.

>>3114771
George II was the last British monarch to lead an army in battle

Henry VI

This thread is like the HYW.

It begins with the English scoring some thanks to the longbow anglo banter and ends up with the English absolutely, utterly, massively btfo and literally stomped by French internet heavy cavalry, (wiki)God and Jeanne d'Arc.

File: 2ad.jpg (129KB, 506x780px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 506x780px

>this hasn't been posted yet

>>3114846
And yet she's laughing at your pathetic bong worm.

>>3115315
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJgAkIg8Epg

>>3111212
how is crecy a meme

>>3112778
>Normans and Anglo-Saxons didn't intermarry

Going to have to disagree with you there Pierre

t. Guy who owes his existence to Normans and Anglo-Saxons intermarrying

>>3114071
Did a bong steal fuck your girlfriend or something? What's with all the anger

>>3115315
Not really. Hundred Years' War ended with substantial territorial gains and the end of Valois-Plantagenent conflict for the French crown

This thread ends with no one gaining anything and will be repeated again and again

>>3116239

He's a ouiboo

>>3115422
Cromwell was against monarchy. Who is the buffoon that made this

>>3112438
Your monarchy was ruled by French at that time, and your entire history consist of being ruled by foreigners

If a monarchy is a joke, it is yours