If England Won the Hundred Years War

Apr 2017
1,758
U.S.A.
If England won the Hundred Years war and unified the realms of England and France, how long could this have lasted? Long term it was only a matter of time before France rebelled and broke away but if England ruled France for hundreds of years is it possible the north would have become more English in character? What about autonomous regions like Brittany and Burgundy? Would England spend resources trying to take territory from the Holy Roman Empire like France did or would they focus on other endeavors? I read that one of the English Kings wanted to conquer France so he could focus on crusading against the turks (earlier 1400's), which would be a prime time as the ottomans were recovering from Tamerlane's raids.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
23,730
SoCal
A lot might depend on whether the Kings of England and France would move their capital from England to France. After all, if Paris becomes the capital of this joint kingdom, then England and France are essentially going to become a Greater France due to France's much larger population.

In such a Greater France, it is very possible--perhaps even likely--that the priorities of the King in charge of Greater France would be very similar to the priorities of the Kings of France in real life. Specifically, I am thinking of French excursions into the Holy Roman Empire and/or into Italy.
 

notgivenaway

Ad Honorem
Jun 2015
5,787
UK
wouldn't it just be a personal union? i don't think King Henry would have politically united the two kingdoms.

Whether he could have held onto it afterwards is moot, considering there were many duchies and counties that had some degree of control.
 

Scaeva

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
5,630
I wonder if it might have resulted in the Englishness of England disappearing over time.

The aristocrats ruling England were descendants of French nobles, and a dialect of French remained the primary language of that class throughout much of the period. French very likely would have hung on as the language of government in England if France and England were unified kingdoms. Rather than the Anglo-Normans being assimilated by the Saxons, the English might have been assimilated by the French.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
23,730
SoCal
I wonder if it might have resulted in the Englishness of England disappearing over time.

The aristocrats ruling England were descendants of French nobles, and a dialect of French remained the primary language of that class throughout much of the period. French very likely would have hung on as the language of government in England if France and England were unified kingdoms. Rather than the Anglo-Normans being assimilated by the Saxons, the English might have been assimilated by the French.
If England would have been Gallicized, one would wonder if its later policy towards colonization of North America would have also been different--with the focus being much more on trading and commerce rather than on settler colonialism.
 
Jun 2017
3,027
Connecticut
If England won the Hundred Years war and unified the realms of England and France, how long could this have lasted? Long term it was only a matter of time before France rebelled and broke away but if England ruled France for hundreds of years is it possible the north would have become more English in character? What about autonomous regions like Brittany and Burgundy? Would England spend resources trying to take territory from the Holy Roman Empire like France did or would they focus on other endeavors? I read that one of the English Kings wanted to conquer France so he could focus on crusading against the turks (earlier 1400's), which would be a prime time as the ottomans were recovering from Tamerlane's raids.
It could have lasted permanently, don't think that was impossible. Henry's son after all would have a claim to the French throne if only he could consolidate his rule. In this era the diversity of a ruler's holdings weren't an issue, they only became so later on. France would have likely become the center of the English royal families possessions as France had more people and was despite the war's outcome the more important and on paper powerful of the two kingdom's.

The main consequence of this I see is the survival of the Burgundians(whose later defeat was due to the French) who might even be able to take control of France or be made an English puppet. It is also likely this changes the outcome of the war of the roses and the Lancester line continues. A different scenario though is a different line seizing power in England and the split occurring that way.
 
Last edited:

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
23,730
SoCal
It could have lasted permanently, don't think that was impossible. Henry's son after all would have a claim to the French throne if only he could consolidate his rule. In this era the diversity of a ruler's holdings weren't an issue, they only became so later on. France would have likely become the center of the English royal families possessions as France had more people and was despite the war's outcome the less important and on paper powerful of the two kingdom's.
You mean "more important and on paper powerful of the two kingdoms", correct?

The main consequence of this I see is the survival of the Burgundians(whose later defeat was due to the French) who might even be able to take control of France or be made an English puppet. It is also likely this changes the outcome of the war of the roses and the Lancester line continues. A different scenario though is a different line seizing power in England and the split occurring that way.
Agreed that this would affect the Wars of the Roses, but why exactly would the English allow the Burgundians to take over France?
 

kazeuma

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
2,423
It would depend if the Wars of the Roses do not break out.
If the Wars do break out - the French would see an opportunity for an independence struggle - enter into the scene Joan of Ark Mark-Two.
If the Wars do not break out - the English language and French language would be greatly restructured.
 
Jun 2017
3,027
Connecticut
You mean "more important and on paper powerful of the two kingdoms", correct?



Agreed that this would affect the Wars of the Roses, but why exactly would the English allow the Burgundians to take over France?
1)Yes thanks for catching that mistake within the editing period.

2)A possibility. They were friends with the Burgundians, the Burgundians were rivals of the main branch of the French royal family. Maybe later in the war they could have been a puppet if after Joan was killed there was no turning point and the English and Burgundians took control of the country? Don't know how they'd get there just hypothesizing here.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,757
Las Vegas, NV USA
Charles V of Hapsburg ended up dividing his many possessions with his brother. Charles chose to live in Spain and Ferdinand remained in Vienna. For a time Austria and Spain remained allies but as Spain declined Austria was the greater of the two. If France and England remained linked in a personal union or likewise allied, the Protestant reformation might not have occurred or remained weak. The Reformation in England actually took place at the height of Habsburg power. France however was generally opposed to the Hapsburgs so Europe would be dominated by two powerful Catholic entities: The Anglo-French kingdom or alliance and the Hapsburg alliance.
 
Last edited: