It wasn’t actually a hundred years long. It was 116. And it wasn’t one continuous war, but a series of brutal, exhausting conflicts that felt like they would never end for the people living through them. When we ask who started the hundred years war, most people want a single name to point a finger at, like a villain in a movie. But history is rarely that clean. It’s a tangle of ego, bad inheritance laws, and a very specific kind of medieval "oops" that changed Europe forever.
The short answer? King Edward III of England started it by claiming he was the rightful King of France. But the long answer involves a dead king with no kids, a salty French nobility, and a legal loophole that felt like a cheap trick even in 1337.
The Royal Identity Crisis of 1328
Imagine your cousin dies. He was the King of France (Charles IV). He has no sons. Usually, that’s a problem, but it’s manageable. However, Charles was the last of the direct Capetian line. The French throne was suddenly sitting there, vacant and shiny, and two very powerful men thought it belonged to them.
One was Philip of Valois. He was the cousin of the dead king. The French liked him because he was, well, French. The other was Edward III. He was the nephew of the dead king through his mother, Isabella (the "She-Wolf of France"). On paper, Edward’s claim was actually stronger. He was a closer relative. But there was a massive problem: the French hated the idea of an English king sitting in Paris.
To block him, French lawyers dug up an ancient, dusty law called the Salic Law. This rule basically said that the throne couldn't be inherited through a woman. Since Edward’s claim came from his mother, the French told him to kick rocks. They crowned Philip VI instead. At first, Edward actually accepted this. He was young, his grip on his own throne was a bit shaky, and he even did "homage" to Philip for his lands in Gascony. He literally knelt before the French king.
Gascony and the Breaking Point
If Edward accepted Philip as king, what changed? Why did the fighting start?
It mostly comes down to Gascony, a region in southwest France that produced a ton of wine and tax revenue for the English. It was a weird geopolitical nightmare. Edward was the King of England, but in Gascony, he was technically a vassal to the French King. Imagine owning a house, but your boss is your landlord. It’s awkward. Philip kept interfering with Edward’s business there, and he also started backing the Scots in their wars against England.
✨ Don't miss: Removing the Department of Education: What Really Happened with the Plan to Shutter the Agency
By 1337, Philip had enough of Edward’s complaining and "confiscated" Gascony. This was the medieval equivalent of declaring war.
Edward’s response was the ultimate "fine, if you’re taking my land, I’m taking your crown." He officially re-asserted his claim to the French throne. He didn't just want his vineyard back anymore; he wanted the whole kingdom. This is the moment history books point to when they discuss who started the hundred years war. It was a formal escalation that turned a property dispute into a dynastic crusade.
The Role of the "She-Wolf"
We can't talk about the start without mentioning Isabella of France. She was Edward III’s mother and the daughter of the powerful Philip IV of France. She was a powerhouse. She had helped overthrow her own husband, Edward II, and she was the one who provided the bloodline link to the French throne. Without her lineage, Edward would have had zero legal standing to even make a claim. Some historians argue she was the true architect of the conflict's logic, even if her son was the one leading the armies.
It Wasn't Just About Kings
While the guys in the crowns were arguing, the merchants were getting nervous. The County of Flanders (modern-day Belgium) was the industrial heart of Europe, famous for its high-quality cloth. They needed English wool to make that cloth.
When the war started, Edward stopped the wool trade to pressure the French. The Flemish people basically revolted because their economy was tanking. They pushed Edward to declare himself King of France so they could technically support him without being "traitors" to a French monarch. It was a massive economic mess.
Money. Power. Pride.
🔗 Read more: Quién ganó para presidente en USA: Lo que realmente pasó y lo que viene ahora
It was a perfect storm. You had a King of England who felt insulted, a King of France who wanted to consolidate his borders, and a whole bunch of knights who were bored and looking for loot.
The First Big Blow: Sluys and Crécy
Once the war started, it didn't take long for things to get ugly. In 1340, at the Battle of Sluys, the English navy absolutely smashed the French fleet. It gave Edward control of the English Channel.
Then came 1346 and the Battle of Crécy. This is where the "who started it" question meets the "who was better at it" reality. The French had more men. They had the "superior" knightly class. But the English had the longbow.
The longbow was the machine gun of the Middle Ages. English and Welsh archers could fire ten arrows a minute. The French crossbowmen could only fire two. At Crécy, the French nobility charged into a wall of arrows. It was a slaughter. This battle proved that the war wasn't going to be a quick skirmish. It was going to be a multi-generational catastrophe.
Was it Actually Just One War?
Honestly, no. It was more like a long-running TV show with several "seasons" or phases:
- The Edwardian War (1337–1360): Edward III goes on a tear, captures the French King John II at the Battle of Poitiers, and wins a huge chunk of land in the Treaty of Brétigny.
- The Caroline War (1369–1389): The French, under Charles V, slowly take almost everything back using scorched-earth tactics.
- The Lancastrian War (1415–1453): This is the Henry V era. The Battle of Agincourt. Shakespeare stuff. This is also when Joan of Arc shows up and changes the vibe completely.
Each of these phases had different "starters," but the core resentment remained the same. The English couldn't let go of their French claims, and the French couldn't tolerate English presence on their soil.
💡 You might also like: Patrick Welsh Tim Kingsbury Today 2025: The Truth Behind the Identity Theft That Fooled a Town
The "Real" Culprit?
If you want to be pedantic, you could blame the Capetian miracle. For over 300 years, every French king had a son to follow him. It was an incredible run of luck. When that luck ran out in 1328, the system wasn't ready. The lack of a clear, undisputed heir created a power vacuum that Edward III was all too happy to fill.
You could also blame the feudal system itself. The idea of "sovereignty" didn't exist back then like it does now. A king could be a king in one place and a subject in another. It was a recipe for disaster. The Hundred Years War was basically the violent birth of modern nations. By the end of it, people stopped thinking of themselves as "the King's men" and started thinking of themselves as "English" or "French."
Why It Still Matters Today
We still see the scars of this war in European culture. The intense rivalry between England and France didn't just appear out of nowhere; it was forged in the fires of the 14th and 15th centuries. It’s why the English longbow is such a symbol of national pride and why Joan of Arc is the ultimate French icon.
It also changed how wars were fought. Before this, war was for "gentlemen" knights. By the end, it was for professional soldiers and gunpowder. The social order of the Middle Ages—the feudal system—was essentially broken by the cost and scale of this conflict.
Actionable Takeaways for History Buffs
If you're looking to dive deeper into the origins and reality of this conflict, don't just stick to the basic textbooks. The history is much more vibrant when you look at the primary sources and specific cultural impacts.
- Read the Chronicles of Jean Froissart. He was basically the combat correspondent of the 14th century. His accounts of the early war are biased, colorful, and fascinating. He gives you the "vibe" of the knightly class that started the mess.
- Visit the Battlefields. If you’re ever in France, the sites of Crécy and Agincourt are eerie and quiet. Standing on the "hollow way" at Agincourt makes you realize how much the terrain dictated the outcome of these massive royal egos.
- Study the Salic Law. If you want to understand the legal side of who started the hundred years war, look into why the French were so desperate to exclude women from the succession. It wasn't just sexism (though there was plenty of that); it was a desperate move to keep English influence out of the French court.
- Look at the Map of 1422. To see how close England came to "winning," check out a map of France after the Treaty of Troyes. Henry VI was technically crowned King of France in Paris. It’s a wild "what if" of history.
The Hundred Years War wasn't just a war. It was the end of the Middle Ages. It started because of a family tree and ended with the creation of two distinct, powerful nations. Edward III might have signed the orders, and Philip VI might have provoked him, but the war was bigger than both of them. It was the sound of an old world dying and a new one being born.