The Nature and Impact of Medieval Warfare

Warfare became a prolonged commitment

Between c.1290 and c.1450, war placed growing demands on rulers, soldiers and ordinary people. Campaigns required not only fighting men but also money, transport, food and supplies. The effects reached beyond battlefields: people could suffer because an army passed through their district, because their ships were taken for military transport or because they were taxed to finance a distant campaign.

The Hundred Years’ War provides important examples of these changes. Fought intermittently between England and France from 1337 to 1453, it was not one continuous battle or campaign. It involved raids, sieges, naval fighting and major land battles, separated by truces. Its final years fall just beyond this lesson’s main period.

The conflict began over lands held by English kings in France. In 1337, Philip VI of France invaded Edward III’s French territories; in 1340, Edward claimed the French crown. Defending territory and pursuing this claim required repeated expeditions across the Channel and the maintenance of English-held strongholds.

From limited feudal service to paid recruitment

Feudal service linked landholding to military obligations: a lord or monarch could expect service from those who held land from him. A knight’s obligation was normally forty days of service each year when summoned, with the required arms and armour. There were disputes over whether this obligation extended to service overseas. These limits made feudal service poorly suited to a campaign or siege lasting several months.

Payment instead of personal service was already an established practice before c.1290. This payment, called scutage, helped rulers obtain money rather than rely entirely on the knights owed through landholding. By the later thirteenth century, barons also negotiated lump-sum payments in place of service, and the numbers of knights they were expected to provide had been reduced. Feudal obligations were therefore being adapted, not simply abolished at one moment.

Under Edward I, who ruled from 1272 to 1307, repeated campaigns—especially in Scotland from 1296—encouraged greater use of paid soldiers. His armies combined men serving through obligations with volunteers and paid troops. He continued to summon men according to their wealth and equipment, but offered royal wages. In 1297, for example, he instructed sheriffs to offer pay to anyone possessing suitable horses and arms. Payment could attract men beyond the traditional pool of knights and wealthy landholders and help retain them for longer campaigns.

Contracts of service, known as indentures, were first used under Edward I and became more common under Edward III. A captain agreed to recruit and lead a force for the Crown in return for payment. By Edward III’s Scottish wars, English armies were paid, although recruitment still used different methods. Captains raised groups of men-at-arms and archers through contracts, while commissions of array organised infantry recruitment from local communities in England and Wales. Contracts were particularly useful for expeditions led overseas by royal commanders rather than by the king himself.

This was a development towards more professional warfare, not the creation of a permanent English standing army. Troops could be recruited for particular campaigns. During breaks in the fighting, English and French soldiers also joined mercenary bands known as the Great Companies. Their military skills remained available for hire, while local populations remained vulnerable to armed men even during periods of official peace.

Infantry and weapons changed battlefield tactics

The growing effectiveness of infantry challenged the idea that mounted knights would necessarily dominate a battle. English longbowmen trained from youth, developing the strength and skill needed to use their bows effectively. Their success depended on training, positioning and cooperation with other troops, not simply possession of a particular weapon.

At Crécy in 1346, Edward III placed his army on a ridge. English longbowmen drove back Genoese crossbowmen, and repeated French cavalry charges failed to break the English position. This showed how a well-positioned army using archers could defeat mounted attacks.

At Agincourt in 1415, Henry V’s archers were protected by wooden stakes. Muddy ground disadvantaged the French men-at-arms, and the French cavalry failed to overcome the archers. Terrain and defensive preparations helped make the longbow effective.

Mounted troops did not disappear, and knights increasingly also fought on foot. Armour developed too, including greater use of plate armour. Warfare therefore changed through adaptations in equipment and tactics rather than a sudden replacement of all older methods.

Gunpowder artillery became increasingly important, particularly in sieges. Large cannon could attack fortifications, although their weight made them difficult to move. At Formigny in 1450, French cannon played a part in the fighting, but the arrival of additional French-allied troops was also crucial. No single weapon explains every victory.

Longer campaigns increased the financial burden

Paid recruitment created a continuing need for money. Armies also needed equipment, provisions and transport. Keeping a garrison supplied or maintaining a siege could consume resources for months, even when no major battle was taking place.

The siege of Calais in 1346–47 illustrates this commitment. Edward III’s army maintained an encirclement while reinforcements and food came from England. The captured port then provided a base for future English operations in France. Winning territory could therefore create further costs because it had to be held and defended.

English rulers repeatedly sought taxation to finance warfare. Edward III called for taxes 27 times during his reign. Parliamentary grants of taxation became important to financing campaigns, giving Parliament repeated opportunities to discuss royal finances and policy. The need for money strengthened Parliament’s place in political life, although it did not immediately give Parliament control over the monarchy.

Taxation also contributed to resentment below the level of government. Poll taxes introduced from 1377 were an important grievance behind the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. War finance was not the revolt’s only cause: tensions connected with the Black Death and conditions of labour also mattered. Nevertheless, distant campaigns could have direct political consequences at home.

Civilians could become deliberate targets

War did not affect only those who fought. A chevauchée deliberately attacked the resources and confidence of an enemy population. Burning crops and plundering settlements could deprive an opposing ruler of resources, damage his reputation as a protector and encourage him to offer battle.

In 1355, Edward III’s son, the Black Prince, led a destructive raid through southern France, between Bordeaux and Narbonne. His army covered roughly 250 miles in just over a month. The raid terrorised inhabitants and destroyed valuable resources. For villagers, the loss of grain or cattle threatened survival and future production as well as causing immediate hardship.

Sieges brought a different form of suffering. Cutting off supplies could force civilians and defenders towards starvation. At Calais in 1347, the inhabitants surrendered after being starved into submission. Citizens were then evicted and replaced by English settlers. The impact therefore included displacement and a lasting change in the town’s population, not simply damage during fighting.

Mercenary bands also plundered towns and villages between campaigns. Soldiers could take grain, livestock and other produce and spread disease. An official truce did not necessarily mean that communities were safe.

Even friendly armies disrupted everyday life

An army did not have to be an enemy force to damage local livelihoods. Troops gathering in south-east England before sailing to France could pillage surrounding communities. Residents faced demands for supplies and the risk of losing property even though they lived away from the main battlefields.

The government also commandeered ships to carry troops across the Channel. This interrupted commercial activity and fishing, particularly affecting herring fishermen. Warfare disrupted the English wool trade with the Low Countries and the wine trade with Gascony. Coastal communities faced direct attack too: the French raided Southampton in 1338.

The impact was therefore uneven. Much of England experienced war through taxation, interrupted trade and preparations for expeditions; communities in campaign areas of France faced more sustained physical destruction. Within either country, a settlement beside an army’s route could suffer far more than one away from it. The nature of the fighting, its duration and the location of armies all shaped the human cost.