The term “manor house” or “castle” is often reserved for large, elaborate homes made of fine materials like stone and typically adorned with sculptural details. As such, several of them have been designated as national landmarks.
Then, what are the differences between a manor house and a castle?
The Latin “castellum” refers to a fortified military structure, which is where we get our term “castle.” “Seigneurial or royal dwelling; a large and beautiful house,” as defined by the dictionaries.
So, it’s a fort that civilians had been living in for some time. They date back to the Roman Empire (27 BC–476 AD), but the shape we are familiar with today emerged throughout the Middle Ages (5th–15th century AD).
The Latin term “maner,” from which our English word “manor” is derived, refers to a house or residence. It is the dwelling of a fief owner who did not have the right to build a castle with towers and a keep.
In the 14th century, when land defense was less of a priority, the first manor houses made their debut.
A historical difference
Aerial image of the Eltz Castle (view from the south). Image: Wikimedia.
As the defensive aspects of castles became obsolete and the feudal structure of the Middle Ages crumbled, the line between a castle and a manor house blurred. In times past, castles were built in the middle of towns to protect the locals from any potential invaders. Fortresses were fortified with moats, walls, a keep, ditches, and drawbridges.
All on a grand scale, with features like great defenses and towering structures that conveyed an advanced architectural style that spoke to the wealth and influence of the owner.
From the time of the Renaissance forward, these fortresses were renovated into elegant mansions complete with gardens, turrets, and other architectural flourishes. However, these features were removed over time by the previous owners, so their existence now is not sufficient to warrant the label “castle.
As opposed to the massive castle, the manor house is much more modest. “Gentilhommière” (which means “small manor house” in English) meant that it belonged to a “gentil” in French. Since the nobleman who lived there oversaw the village’s farms, his residence had the highest status in the community. But cheesemaking, livestock breeding, and winemaking were all viable possibilities on these sites.
The owner had to beg the lord to defend him from invasion and conflict, but unlike city rulers, the owner couldn’t build a keep or towers to assert his/her independence. Even now, a manor conjures up images of a stately rural home, one whose grand size is not out of scale with the rest of the property.
Without a doubt, Tutankhamun is one of the most well-known pharaohs in history. The king, who was likely born about 1340 B.C., only ruled for a decade at most. The British archaeologist Howard Carter and his colleagues discovered the tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamun in Egypt’s Valley of the Kings on November 4, 1922. With its four separate rooms along with an entry hall and stairs, the tomb is still regarded as one of the greatest archaeological finds ever discovered. The reason for this is the astonishing vast array of artifacts that the British explorer Howard Carter and his team discovered in the tomb. Over the course of three millennia, over 5,000 objects were preserved, providing a priceless look into the arts and culture of the pharaohs. As we celebrate 200 years since the discovery, here is a look at six artifacts unearthed from Tutankhamun’s tomb.
The mask of Tutankhamun
The burial mask of Tutankhamun is, without a doubt, the most well-known artifact in the world. Even though the tomb was initially discovered in November 1922, this artifact wasn’t discovered until October 1925, when investigators unsealed the last sarcophagus guarding the mummy of the king. The mask stands around 20 inches (50 cm) tall, 16 inches (40 cm) broad, and 20 inches (50 cm) deep, and it weighs just over 22 pounds (10 kg), making it a magnificent masterpiece of Egyptian goldsmithing.
It is composed of two gold plates that have been combined and adorned with several semiprecious stones, including lapis lazuli, quartz (for the eyes), and obsidian. Despite a reconstruction suggesting that Tutankhamun was not as handsome as this masterpiece claims, his face is shown on a headpiece that is topped by two significant animals: the vulture and the cobra.
More than that, there is a theory that the mask was not intended for the emperor who died so suddenly and abruptly, much like his grave.
The meteorite iron dagger
Tutankhamun’s meteorite-iron dagger.
A wide variety of weapons, such as arrows, shields, and swords are among the more than 5,000 items found in Tutankhamun’s tomb. A dagger with an iron blade and a gold sheath set with beautiful stones stood out among the weapons available. Experts paid attention to it since ironwork in Egypt was still in its infancy during the reign of Tutankhamun (during the 18th dynasty, between 1332 and 1323 BC), when the art was only being developed.
The unique history of the item, which would have begun outside the kingdom of the pharaohs, has been uncovered via studies, the most recent of which was published in February 2022.
It has been suggested that King Tushratta of Mitani (whose capital was located in modern-day Syria) presented the weapon to Amenhotep III (the father of Akhenaten and the grandfather of Tutankhamun) as a gift between 1380 and 1350 BC. The item is even more valuable since the investigation of its composition revealed that its metal was not of earthly origin; rather, it would have originated from an iron meteorite.
An Egyptian carrying the “mannequin” bust of Tutankhamun found in the tomb unearthed in 1922.
Among the many statues and paintings depicting the pharaoh found in his tomb, the one that was found half-hidden in the pre-chamber stood out. An unfinished wooden bust with a snake on its head. The face is identical to those seen in previous three-dimensional depictions of Tutankhamun, and the skin is painted dark red, the hue commonly employed by ancient Egyptian artists to portray males. The sculpture’s usefulness is its defining characteristic.
Howard Carter believes the statue to be a mannequin used to try on Tutankhamun’s attire and jewels. For instance, the bust has markings that are consistent with a corselet having been worn, much like the one discovered in the tomb. Gold sandals are only one example of the many articles of clothing and accessories that have been discovered in the different rooms, all of which point to the pharaoh having a sizable wardrobe to the end of time and beyond
A pair of trumpets
Put on display the silver trumpet and its wooden mute.
Musical instruments were among the hundreds of artifacts discovered in King Tut’s tomb, with a particularly impressive pair of trumpets being located in two separate chambers. The length of one silver one is around 20 inches or 50 cm. The second one is made of bronze and is a touch smaller. However, both have engravings of several deities, including Amun and Ra. These are the earliest known working trumpets and the only ones known from ancient Egypt.
A musician named James Tappern performed with one of them on a BBC broadcast in 1939, bringing their music back into the world after more than 3,000 years of obscurity. These days, it’s not acceptable to handle relics because of how delicate they are. While the bronze trumpet was taken from the Egyptian Museum in Cairo in 2011, it turned up missing just weeks later.
The sanctuary of Anubis
The Anubis figure on the shrine at Tutankhamun’s tomb.
The ancient Egyptian tombs often include depictions of the deity Anubis. Tutankhamun’s tomb was no different. Howard Carter and his crew, when investigating the tomb, came upon a statue of the god with a jackal’s body. The animal is lying down on a bed of black painted wood, and it has silver claws and gold ears.
It was located on top of a shrine that had suddenly materialized next to Tutankhamun’s tomb, just over a chest that held the King Tut’s canopic vases. Jewelry, amulets, and other trinkets were stored in the trapezoidal compartment. It has been acquired by the Egyptian Museum in Cairo and is on permanent exhibit.
The throne of Tutankhamun
Tutankhamun’s golden throne, included statues of both him and his queen.
Several artifacts unearthed inside the pharaoh’s tomb demonstrate the ancient Egyptians’ level of sophistication.
This is the situation with Tutankhamun’s golden throne. The royal chair is a work of art, crafted from wood and gilded with precious metals. Colored glass and semiprecious stones are used for ornamentation. In the shape of winged snakes adorned with the double crown of the pharaohs, two lion heads guard the ends of the armrests.
Tutankhamun and his wife, Ankhesenamun, are shown on the backrest. However, the throne’s inscriptions suggest it was created while the pair was still known as Tutankhaton and Ankhesenaton, after the deity Aten. In addition to its display in the Louvre, this object is also housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
The hundreds of artifacts that were discovered in Tutankhamun’s tomb include a number of extraordinary items. Another is the king’s coffin and mummy, both of which have provided significant insight into the life and times of the young man who reigned from the ages of 9 to 19.
Tutankhamun’s tomb in the Valley of the Kings had the bulk of its contents initially removed, but the remaining items were later brought back and are currently kept within. Even yet, the pharaoh’s tomb still holds some mysteries despite the amazing burial collection. It keeps prompting more and more curiosity. A considerable portion of Tutankhamun’s wealth may not be his, as shown by objects that have displayed traces of re-engraving. After his tragic death, it was probably meant for someone else and credited to him.
When it comes to agriculture, demography and peasant life. Significant changes and advances occurred in the 18th century, after what has been called a “miserable 17th century,” defined by many economic challenges and social conflicts. Faith in the advancement of reason and technology won out during the Age of Enlightenment and was used as a rallying cry for those who wanted social change. Despite the fact that civilization had been defined for many centuries by three extremely powerful limits (biological, nutritional, and material), the 18th century undoubtedly exhibited a more favorable condition that would progressively tear these barriers down. Population growth and significant changes in agriculture’s technological, structural, and cultural aspects provide striking examples of this trend.
Population surge in the 18th century
Throughout the modern century, France had been Europe’s most populous country, but its population of 20–22 million people appeared to be its limit. This was a significant gap from the 7 million in England, the 13 million in Germany and Italy, and the 8 million in Spain. There was widespread population expansion throughout Europe around the turn of the 18th century; by 1725, France had 25 million residents, and by 1770, it had 28 million.
A dramatic drop in death rates was mostly responsible for this development since it affected natural growth. During the Ancien Régime, a high birth rate (40 per 1000) was cruelly regulated by a high mortality rate (30 per 1000), especially among young children; one in two did not reach adulthood; life expectancy did not exceed 30 years, and the population ultimately did not grow very much. Death rates dropped (particularly among young people), while birth rates stayed about the same, leading to a rise in the proportion of males in the population beginning in the 18th century.
The general improvement in biological circumstances was the main reason for this decrease in mortality. The conquest, war, hunger, and death, a.k.a. the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse,” at the root of the severe population decline, were now less frequent. But poor harvests due to unfavorable meteorological conditions contributed to rising grain prices across Europe, especially as a recurring theme in the Ancien Régime crises in France.
Since the majority of the peasant’s income was going toward bread at the time, they found themselves in a difficult position as prices continued to rise, especially during the time just before the harvest when grain was at a premium. Disputes erupted as a result, especially since some people stocked up on grain and then sold it at a higher price, intending to make a profit.
Droughts, of which contemporary observers were well aware, tended to be followed by other droughts. Not because there wasn’t enough food, but because it was too costly to buy. People got hungry because they didn’t have enough money to buy food, and they frequently died after eating disgusting things like bran bread, nettle soup, animal viscera collected from slaughterhouses, etc.
According to historians, rotting food was the leading cause of death worldwide. As a result of this general decline in organism strength, deadly epidemics broke out, sometimes wiping out entire villages (as happened with the plague and smallpox), wreaking havoc on the most vulnerable members of society (including children and the elderly), and driving mortality rates through the roof, as happened in Marseilles during the plague epidemic of 1750, when 50,000 people lost their lives.
These catastrophic outbreaks ended when people began eating a more diversified and regular diet in the 18th century. Crop failures became less frequent as the climate warmed up from the harsh conditions of the Little Ice Age, which had lasted for the preceding century. The introduction of potatoes and corn (5 times more nutritious than wheat), as well as the development of vegetable crops, allowed everyone to better resist epidemics and very frequent and symptomatic deficiencies (large bellies, teeth problems, etc.) People were generally better nourished and healthier.
In the 18th century, basic hygiene practices improved, which helped keep infants and mothers healthy. But the well water was often tainted by the manure at the peasants’ doorstep. In the realm of birthing, which had hitherto been the domain of matrons with only empirical knowledge and no consideration for cleanliness, significant strides were achieved. With the advent of more sophisticated infrastructure and educated staff, medicalized births became the norm.
The midwife Angélique du Coudray, who in 1756 was granted a royal patent allowing her to teach the art of delivery in the provinces, or the “surgeon man-midwife” Mauquest de La Motte, who in 1715 produced a treatise on natural and unnatural childbirth. Because of the shocking death rate among young children, attitudes about children were shifting worldwide, and more and more individuals were diligent about placing youngsters in foster homes.
The number of wars that occurred outside of the kingdoms likewise decreased in the 18th century. Previously, many lives were lost on the front lines because of war. Yet its repercussions were as devastating: damage, fires, theft of food and cattle, etc., happened all along the route of the soldiers, who brought a lot of illnesses to their countries. Therefore, the significance of peace was evident but still limited to far-off lands like the War of the Austrian Succession, for example.
As a result, in the 18th century, the population increased dramatically around the world due to the favorable biological circumstances brought on by the peace.
Changing agriculture
Summer, Brueghel the Younger. (Image: Wikimedia Commons)
To meet the food needs of a growing population, agriculture also progressed, undergoing significant changes during the same period. The first was the development of more efficient tools. Since the last 1000 years, it had changed very little. It was mainly constructed of wood, yet it was fitted to the farming methods of the period and still resulted in subpar harvests. The technological systems, however, progressed in the 18th century.
The historian Bertrand Gille introduced this concept which outlines a cohesive group of technologies that together represent a distinct epoch in the development of both technology and society. When the peasants began to access better tools, the resulting increase in revenue was substantial in the 18th century. So, a bigger plow was accomplished by developing a plow with more iron and using the third horse for the carriage. At this time, the scythe replaced the sickle.
In this period, the constraining crop rotation systems started to change, demanding that farmers observe certain planting and harvesting cycles, as well as rest intervals in between harvests. A quadrennial rotation, also known as the “Norfolk rotation” or “Norfolk four-course system,” was actually first adopted in England in the 17th century, evolving from the bi-annual rotation (alternating a cultivated plot with a fallow plot) and the tri-annual rotation (a plot of winter wheat, a plot of spring wheat, and a fallow plot). An example of the Norfolk rotation was the plot of wheat, the plot of fodder turnip, the plot of barley, and the plot of clover.
This rotation had the advantage of eliminating fallow land and promoting livestock. By including animal grazing on clover plots as part of the rotation, a significantly more efficient source of nitrogen was made available compared to the conventional manuring methods of using ashes and manure.
As a result of this boost in output, individual vineyard sites became more highly specialized. Large swaths of land across Europe were now devoted to grain monoculture, whereas the poorer soil was more likely to be used for market gardening. These places honed their craft and were dedicated to producing only the highest quality crops, such as wine.
More grains also implied more straw and other feed for cattle. Livestock had traditionally been relied upon as a safety net in times of need; however, because of the prevalence of feed crises, these animals were generally of low quality and quantity. Increased cattle productivity throughout time improved soil fertilization methods.
Manure was formerly only accessible in limited amounts, was easily spoiled, and allowed for only average soil preparation, but now some farmers were able to trade straw for it. In addition, the gradual elimination of grazing and the enclosure of land, both of which were already practiced in England and which gradually saw the emergence of private property and facilitated the implementation of the new techniques mentioned above, resulted from the improved availability of fodder.
New crop species, such as potatoes and corn, were developed in the 18th century after being transported from the Americas towards the end of the 16th century. With corn’s greater yield than wheat, inexpensive flour could be produced, making it a viable alternative to more costly grains like rye, barley, and buckwheat. After being put to use as fodder for cattle to help with the perennial issue of cow feeding, it found its way into the diets of the impoverished as a supplement. Even though wheat was considered a staple food, potatoes were five times more nutritious.
Clearly, agriculture was flourishing, as shown by the plethora of agronomy books. In the wake of the Enlightenment and the ideas of the physiocrats around the year 1750, led by François Quesnay, agriculture was seen as the sole productive sector of the economy. A large portion of the nobility and wealthy landowners were swayed by the physiocrats’ ideas. They tried growing several kinds of plants, using crop rotation strategies, etc. Lavoisier, a scientist, professor, and farmer-general, was actively engaged in this movement.
The agricultural sector, which accounted for three-quarters of the physical product in the 18th century, saw significant improvement due to the convergence of a number of factors (tools, new crops, physiocrats, etc.). This allowed the sector to increase its yield and its production, thereby supporting the rising population.
Peasant life in the 18th century
Even with the observed population improvement, stark differences were present. The first was the inevitability of death. Infant mortality had gone down, but it was still terrible since advancement was gradual, hygiene standards hadn’t improved much, people lived in crowded, unsanitary conditions, and animals were close by, all of which contributed to the spread of illness. Education in general and literacy specifically were both on the rise. However, ignorance persisted, particularly in rural areas.
Some scholars started to believe that a significant number of fatalities could be attributed to the lack of education among mothers. As if that weren’t enough, there was also the burden of tradition and superstition, both of which were condemned by Erasmus, for instance, in the 16th century. Most moderns were aware of this condition of widespread belief and recognized it for the constraining force that it was. As a preventative measure against rabies, local farmers traditionally took their animals to churches to be blessed.
Most people, especially farmers (who made up the vast majority of the population), still lived in abject poverty. Even though the number of crises was decreasing, people were still vulnerable to epidemics like the one in Marseille in 1750 and natural disasters like the Great Frost in 1709. In addition, each crisis was accompanied by the phenomenon of wandering as people tried to escape their current situation in the hopes of finding a better one elsewhere. Those living in dire circumstances typically took on debt well in excess of their property’s worth to cover costs like taxes, seeds, and farm equipment.
Even though there were more people to feed as a result of the population boom, and this boosted agricultural output to some extent, the reality was that the influx of people led to a fragmentation of land and estates, worsening the already precarious situation of the peasants, especially as rent rose and the owners became wealthier and more able to exploit them.
Persistently traditional
There had been development in agriculture, to be sure, but by no means can we call it a revolution. The rate of development varied widely from one state to the next. As a result of a number of incremental improvements, a step forward was made, albeit only in a certain area. In this mostly wooden society, iron tools were still a rarity, and the transmission of information from generation to generation within the agricultural community was not conducive to technological advancement.
Farmers in regions where life was based primarily on cereal monoculture were much more vulnerable to the effects of a bad harvest than their counterparts in other regions where a more diverse culture was possible thanks to favorable climate and soil conditions, even if bread continued to form the basis of the food bowl.
The new crops were met with stiff opposition. Corn and potatoes, despite their numerous benefits, continued to be utilized primarily as livestock feed and as emergency food sources. Despite the favorable attitude toward corn in certain lands, these plants were having a hard time breaking through. This opposition existed in part because local farmers feared economic ruin if they “missed” a harvest of a plant they had never cultivated before. In 1840, around one-third of most European agricultural lands were still considered fallow.
After all that, the English enclosure system, popular since the 17th century, was seen as a threat to communal farms. A sizable portion of the peasant population had their access to resources cut off as a result of these field enclosures and grazing prohibitions.
Efforts in the field of hygiene were the cause of the population boom, although advancement was modest and uneven across urban and rural areas. Due to widespread hostility against change, conventional farming practices persisted during the 18th century.
The Battle of Trafalgar took place on October 21, 1805, between the French and Spanish fleets commanded by Vice Admiral Villeneuve and the British fleet commanded by Vice Admiral Nelson. While Vice Admiral Nelson was killed, the British were able to prevail despite being outnumbered. After the Battle of Trafalgar, Napoleon abandoned his plans to conquer Britain, and the British Navy established its dominance over the oceans. Following this decisive victory, England performed a number of symbolic acts to honor the occasion.
—>Admiral Nelson employed a bold and aggressive tactic known as the “Nelson Touch,” where he divided the British fleet into two columns and aimed to break through the Franco-Spanish line. This tactic allowed the British to engage the enemy fleet more effectively.
Why Was the Battle of Trafalgar Fought?
Napoleon defeating Austrian General Mack while Nelson seizes French ships, colonies, and trade, British cartoon by Isaac Cruikshank, November 19, 1805.
After the short Peace of Amiens, hostilities between the United Kingdom and France resumed on May 18. Napoleon Bonaparte‘s goal of invading and conquering Britain remained steadfast despite his extensive travels throughout Europe. In order to vanquish his most formidable foe, he mustered an army in the Boulogne camp.
When the French monarch dared to challenge the British, he had to do so with a fleet that could compete with and hopefully defeat the British navy. Conquering the landmass without first dominating the waters around the island was an absurd idea. So he gave Vice Admiral Villeneuve the job of assembling a fleet.
Who Fought in the Battle of Trafalgar?
Death of Nelson on the deck of the HMS Victory.
At the Battle of Trafalgar, Vice Admiral Villeneuve led the Franco-Spanish fleet against Vice Admiral Nelson’s British fleet. It was Napoleon himself who gave Villeneuve, the military leader, the responsibility of assembling a navy strong enough to confront and destroy the British. On the other hand, the British government chose Vice Admiral Nelson because of the creative ways in which he deviated from conventional military strategy.
Nelson was able to think on his feet and take swift action, allowing him to consistently outmaneuver his superiors. Even though he was killed in action at Trafalgar, his efforts set him apart from the competition and helped secure victory for an outnumbered British force. And whereas the Franco-Spanish fleet had 33 ships of the line, six frigates, and two brigs, the British fleet only had 27.
The victory was thus rather favorable to the Franco-Spanish troops, who, sure of Nelson’s strategy, let themselves be trapped. During the conflict, Nelson told his troops, “England expects that every man will do his duty,” a phrase that has since been ingrained in the language of the English-speaking world.
The Victory, Royal Sovereign, Temeraire, Neptune, and Britannia were the primary ships representing Britain in the conflict. The French and Spanish fleets included such ships as the Neptuno, the Principe de Asturias, the Indomptable, the Santa Anna, the Rayo, and the Santisima Trinidad.
—>Admiral Nelson, full name Horatio Nelson, was a British naval officer who led the Royal Navy at the Battle of Trafalgar. He devised innovative naval tactics and strategies that contributed to the British victory, although he lost his life during the battle.
Who Won the Battle of Trafalgar?
Horatio Nelson.
British forces, under the command of Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson, prevailed in the Battle of Trafalgar on October 21, 1805. Though outnumbered, they had much more battlefield experience than their French and Spanish counterparts. Nonetheless, the British owe their success, in all likelihood, to the strategies Nelson used. The later plan included a perpendicular rather than a frontal assault, cutting the defensive line of the Franco-Spanish fleet.
The British plan worked, as Villeneuve was captured and 23 of the French and Spanish fleet’s 33 ships were destroyed. More than 7,000 people were killed, 2,500 were injured, and hundreds of detainees were taken. The British navy suffered significantly less damage; they lost no vessels and just 400 men.
While the French celebrated the capture of the ship Le Redoutable, the British forces were still mourning the loss of their vice admiral, Nelson, who was killed by a sharpshooter. Within hours of being shot, he was dead because the bullet had entered his spine, lung, and left shoulder. Despite this significant loss, the British were still able to gain undeniable maritime supremacy.
What Were the Results of the Battle of Trafalgar?
Trafalgar Square in London was named to commemorate the Battle of Trafalgar. The square features Nelson’s Column, a monument dedicated to Admiral Nelson, and has become a symbolic location honoring British naval victories. Dietmar Rabich / Wikimedia Commons / “London, Trafalgar Square, Nelson’s Column — 2016 — 4851” / CC BY-SA 4.0.
Napoleon gave up on his intentions to attack England after losing at Trafalgar and instead turned his attention to the rest of Europe. The French navy never again made an effort to attack Britain through the sea after this victory solidified British maritime superiority. The French navy continued its operations despite the country’s loss. In contrast, the Spanish fleet suffered heavy losses at the hands of the British during the Battle of Trafalgar.
There are several symbolic remnants from the Battle of Trafalgar that are still there today. In the Royal Navy, for instance, you may see HMS Victory, the ship that Admiral Nelson used. Also, the British instituted a holiday called Trafalgar Day to commemorate the victory, although hardly anyone seems to remember it now.
Last but not least, we must not overlook Trafalgar Square, one of the British memorials to the success of the Battle of Trafalgar. There is a statue of Admiral Nelson atop a tall column in this plaza in the heart of London, which bears the name of the epic fight.
The State of the Forces at War
The British advanced in two parallel columns, some distance apart: In the north, the 12-ship line led by Horatio Nelson himself consisted of the following ships:
HMS Africa (two-decker of 64 guns, crew of 498 men under the command of Captain Henry Digby), charged with attacking the head of the Franco-Spanish fleet
HMS Victory (flagship, three-decker of 104 guns, crew of 821 men under the command of Captain Thomas Masterman Hardy), with Vice Admiral Lord Nelson on board, commander in chief of the fleet
HMS Temeraire (three-decker of 98 guns, crew of 718 men under the command of Captain Eliab Harvey)
HMS Neptune (three-decks of 98 guns, crew of 741 men under the command of Captain Thomas Francis Fremantle)
HMS Leviathan (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 623 men under the command of Captain Henry William Bayntun)
HMS Conqueror (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 573 men under the command of Captain Israel Pellew)
HMS Britannia (three-decks of 100 guns, crew of 854 men under the command of Rear-Admiral William Carnegie, 7th Earl of Northesk)
HMS Spartan (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 620 men under the command of Captain Sir Francis Laforey)
HMS Minotaur (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 625 men under the command of Captain Charles John Moore Mansfield)
HMS Ajax (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 702 men under the command of Lieutenant John Pilford)
HMS Agamemnon (two-decks of 64 guns, crew of 498 men under the command of Captain Sir Edward Berry)
HMS Orion (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 541 men under the command of Captain Edward Codrington)
A leeward column, composed of the following 15 vessels (Vice-Admiral Cuthbert Collingwood’s division):
HMS Royal Sovereign (three-decks of 100 guns, crew of 826 men under the command of Captain Edward Rotheram, with on board Vice-Admiral Cuthbert Collingwood)
HMS Belleisle (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 728 men under the command of Captain William Hargood)
HMS Mars (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 615 men under the command of Captain George Duff and Lieutenant William Hennah)
HMS Tonnant (two-decks of 80 guns, crew of 688 men under the command of Captain Charles Tyler)
HMS Bellerophon (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 522 men under the command of Captain John Cooke then Lieutenant William Pryce Cumby)
HMS Colossus (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 571 men under the command of Captain James Nicoll Morris)
HMS Achilles (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 619 men under the command of Captain Richard King)
HMS Defence (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 599 men under the command of Captain George Hope)
HMS Defiance (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 577 men under the command of Captain Philip Charles Durham)
HMS Prince (three-decks of 98 guns, crew of 735 men under the command of Captain Richard Grindall)
HMS Dreadnought (three-decks of 98 guns, crew of 725 men under the command of Captain John Conn)
HMS Revenge (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 598 men under the command of Captain Robert Moorsom)
HMS Swiftsure (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 570 men under the command of Captain William Gordon Rutherfurd)
HMS Thunderer (two-decks of 74 guns, crew of 611 men under the command of Lieutenant John Stockham)
HMS Polyphemus (two-decks of 64 guns, crew of 484 men under the command of Captain Robert Redmill).
An attached fleet is also composed of the following vessels:
HMS Euryalus (frigate of 36 guns, crew of 262 men under the command of Captain The Honourable Henry Blackwood)
HMS Naiad (36-gun frigate, crew of 333 under the command of Captain Thomas Dundas)
HMS Phoebe (36-gun frigate, crew of 256 men under the command of Captain The Honourable Thomas Bladen Capel)
HMS Sirius (36-gun frigate, crew of 273 under the command of Captain William Prowse)
HMS Pickle (schooner of 8 guns, crew of 42 men under the command of Lieutenant John Richards La Penotière)
HMS Entreprenante (10-gun cutter, crew of 41 men under the command of Lieutenant Robert Benjamin Young).
The French and Spanish fleet sailed in a circle with a concave side toward the enemy, spanning three nautical miles. The allied ships did not move forward in a single, continuous line, but rather in five different groups, each of which followed a roughly linear path but was severely isolated from the others.
These 33 vessels were arranged from north to south as follows:
Spain’s Neptuno, the two-decker with 80 cannons, crew of 800 men, and Captain Don Cayetano Cayetano Valdés y Flores in charge.
France’s Scipion, a two-decked gunboat with 74 cannons and 755 men serving under the command of Captain Charles Berrenger
France’s Intrépide was a two-decker gunboat with 74 cannons and had a crew of 745 men working under the direction of Captain Louis-Antoine-Cyprien Infernet.
France’sFormidable, two decks with 80 guns, crew of 840 men, commanded by Rear Admiral Pierre-Etienne-René-Marie Dumanoir Le Pelley and Captain Jean-Marie Letellier.
France’s Duguay-Trouin, the two-decker had 74 cannons and carried a crew of 755 men. Captain Claude Touffet was in charge of the vessel.
France’s Mont-Blanc was a ship with two decks and 74 guns, and it had a crew of 755 men who were commanded by Guillaume-Jean-Noel de Lavillegris.
Spain’s Rayo was a three-decker warship with a total of 100 cannons. It had a crew of 830 men and was commanded by Don Enrique MacDonnell.
Spain’s San Francisco de Ass, a two-decker with 74 guns and a crew of 657 men, was commanded by Captain Don Luis de Florès.
France’s Héros had 74 guns and a crew of 690 men. Corvette captain Jean-Baptiste-Joseph-René Poulain and subsequently lieutenant Jean-Louis Conor were in charge of the two-decker ship at various times.
Spain’s San Agustin was a two-decker warship with 74 guns and 711 men serving under the leadership of Captain Don Felipe Jado Cajigal.
Spain’s Santisima Trinidad was a 136-gun four-decker with a crew of 1,048 men. Rear Admiral Baltasar Hidalgo de Cisneros y de la Torre and Captain Francisco Javier de Uriarte y Borja were in charge of the ship.
France’s Bucentaure, the flagship was a two-decker with 80 cannons and had a crew of 888 men under the command of Captain Jean-Jacques Magendie. Vice Admiral Pierre-Charles-Jean-Baptiste-Silvestre de Villeneuve was also present on board.
France’s Redoutable, a two-decker with 74 guns and 643 men serving under the command of Captain Jean Jacques Étienne Lucas.
Spain’s San Justo was a ship with two decks and a total of 74 cannons. It had a crew of 694 men and was commanded by Don Francisco Javier Garstón.
France’s Neptune, two decks with 80 guns, and 888 men serving as crew under the direction of the captain of ship 1st class Esprit-Tranquille Maistral.
Spain’s San Leandro with two decks and 64 cannons, and a crew of 606 men, all under the direction of the ship’s captain, Don José Quevedo.
Spain’s Santa Ana was a three-decker warship with a total of 112 cannons and a crew of 1189 men. She was commanded by Vice Admiral Ignacio Mara de Llava y Sáenz de Navarrete and Captain Don José Ramón de Gardoqui y Jaraveitia. Santa Ana was in service during the Spanish American War.
France’s L’Indomptable was a two-decker battleship equipped with 80 cannons and boasting an 887-man crew that was led by Captain Jean-Joseph Hubert.
France’s Le Fougueux was a two-decker gunboat with 74 cannons and had a crew of 755 men under the leadership of Captain Louis Alexis Baudouin.
France’s Pluton, a two-decker with 74 cannons and a crew of 755 men, was commanded by Captain of the First Class Julien Julien Cosmao.
Spain’s Monarca was a warship with two decks and 74 guns, and it had a crew of 667 men who were commanded by Don Teodoro de Argumosa Bourke, the captain of the ship.
France’s Algeciras had a total of 74 cannons between her two bridges and a crew of 755 men. Rear Admiral Charles René Magon de Médine and afterwards Commander Laurent Tourneur were in charge of the vessel.
Spain’s Bahama was a two-decker ship of 74 guns and a crew of 690 men. Commodore Dionisio Alcalá Galiano y Pinedo was in charge of the vessel.
France’s L’Aigle was a two-decker gunboat with 74 cannons and a crew of 755 men. Captain Pierre-Paulin Gourrège was in command.
Spain’s Montaés, a two-decker with 74 guns and 715 men serving under the command of Captain Francisco Alcedo y Bustamante.
France’s Swiftsure was a two-decker with 74 guns and a crew of 755 men. Captain Charles-Eusèbe Lhospitalier de Villemadrin was in command.
France’s Argonaute was a naval force consisting of two 74-gun warships, a total crew of 755 men, with Captain Jacques Épron-Desjardins in charge.
Spain’s Argonauta was a two-decker warship equipped with 80 cannons and boasting a crew of 798 men who were led by Captain Don José Antonio de Pareja y Mariscal.
Spain’s San Ildefonso was a two-decker warship with 74 cannons. It had a crew of 716 men and was commanded by Captain Don José Ramón de Vargas y Varáez.
France’s Achille was a two-decker ship with 74 cannons and had 755 men working for her under the command of Captain Louis Gabriel Deniéport.
Spain’s Príncipe de Asturias, three-decker of 112 guns, crew of 1113 men under the direction of Commodore Rafael de Hore, having on board Admiral Don Federico Carlos Gravina and Rear Admiral Don Antonio de Escaño y García de Cáceres
France’s Berwick, two-decker with 74 cannons, crew of 755 men, and Captain Jean-Gilles Filhol de Camas in command.
Spain’s San Juan Nepomuceno was a two-decker warship with 74 guns and a crew of 693 men. Commodore Don Cosme Damián Churruca y Elorza was in charge of the ship’s crew.
An attached fleet included the following vessels, all French:
Cornélie was a frigate with 40 guns and was commanded by André-Juls-Francois de Martineng.
Hermione is a forty-gun frigate that is commanded by Captain Jean-Michel Mahé.
Hortense was a forty-gun frigate that was commanded by Louis-Charles-Auguste Delamarre de Lamellerie.
Rhin was a frigate with 40 guns and was commanded by Captain Michel Chesneau.
Thémis, Captain Nicolas-Joseph-Pierre Jugan was in charge of the 40-gun frigate, which was named after him.
Furet, a brig armed with 18 cannons and with a crew of 130 men, it was commanded by Lieutenant Pierre-Antoine-Toussaint Dumay.
Argus was a 16-gun brig with 110 men on board and was commanded by Lieutenant Yves-Francois Taillard.
Together, the Allies’ 33 warships and 7 frigates sported 2,856 cannons. Only 27 ships and 6 frigates or corvettes were available to the English, together with 2,314 cannons. Their ships were typically quicker, more nimble, better directed, and served by commanders and sailors who were more experienced and more educated, and they had 7 three-deck ships versus the allies’ four (all Spanish).
Damage Report of the Battle of Trafalgar
The Allies suffered a crushing loss. The English were successful in seizing 17 vessels out of a total of 33 that were involved in the battle. Eighteenth went down in the water. Four of the fifteen survivors, commanded by Dumanoir, made their way to the open sea, while the other eleven sought sanctuary in Cadiz with Gravina. Around 6,500 people were killed or injured, among them were 3,000 French and over 1,000 French wounded. Nine ship captains, including Rear Admiral Magon, perished. Ten others were wounded, as well as Rear Admirals Gravina, Álava and Báltasar Hidalgo de Cisneros. A large number of Villeneuve’s soldiers, numbering in the thousands, also became prisoners.
Here are the details of the fate of each ship:
Neptuno: Recaptured by the allies and then failed before Cadiz
Scipion: Taken on November 4
Intrepid: Voluntarily burned by the English after its capture
Formidable: Taken on November 4
Duguay-Trouin: Taken on November 4
Mont-Blanc: Taken on November 4
Rayo: Burned by the English before Cadiz after its stranding
San Francisco de Asís: Rescued
Hero: Rescued
San Agustín: Voluntarily burned by the English after its capture
Santísima Trinidad: Scuttled by the English after its capture
Bucentaure: Recaptured by its crew then wrecked
Redoubtable: Scuttled by the English after its capture
San Justo: Rescued
Neptune: Rescued
San Leandro: Rescued
Santa Ana: Recaptured by the Allies in front of Cadiz
The Indomitable: Rescued
The Fiery: Abandoned by the English after its capture and then wrecked
Pluto: Rescued
Monarca: Abandoned by the English after its capture and then wrecked
Algeciras: Recaptured by her crew
Bahama: Sunk
L’Aigle: Abandoned by the English after its capture then wrecked
Montañés: Rescued
Swiftsure: Taken to Gibraltar then destroyed
Argonaut: Rescued
Argonauta: Scuttled by the English after its capture
San Ildefonso: Taken to Gibraltar and destroyed
Achilles: Burned and sunk
Príncipe de Asturias: Rescued
Berwick: Abandoned by the English after its capture and wrecked
San Juan Nepomuceno: Rescued.
In all, 449 British sailors were killed, including Admiral Horatio Nelson, and 1,214 were injured. Of the ships involved, the HMS Colossus suffered the most casualties (40), while 13 others had fewer than 10, and one had none (the HMS Prince). Despite the relatively low number of casualties, the damage was so severe that half of the fleet had to seek shelter in Gibraltar.
Map of the Battle of Trafalgar
Period representation of the battle: the British ships are in red, the French in green and the Spanish in yellow. The British ship furthest north is the Africa, not the Neptune.
References
Best, Nicholas (2005). Trafalgar. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 0-297-84622-1.
Corbett, Sir Julian Stafford (1919). The campaign of Trafalgar. Vol. 2. Longmans, Green, and company. p. 538. URL.
Lavery, Brian (2009). Empire of the Seas. London: Conway Publishing. ISBN 9781844861095.
Lee, Christopher (2005). Nelson and Napoleon. London: Headline Book Publishing. ISBN 0-7553-1041-1.
A. Thomazi, Trafalgar, Payot, 1932, 199 p.
Danielle et Bernard Quintin, Dictionnaire des capitaines de vaisseau de Napoléon, collection Kronos, Paris 2003.
When the twentieth century began, China was suffocating beneath the weight of the major Western powers. To be sure, the nation was compelled to open up economically, politically, and spiritually to other countries following the Opium Wars and the Sino-Japanese War. In addition, a secret organization, whose members were termed “Boxers” by Europeans, revolted in 1899 in an effort to free the nation. The growth of Chinese nationalism would hasten the fall of the Qing dynasty’s Manchu monarchy and bring about more foreign involvement in China.
Why Did the Boxer Rebellion Break Out?
The Manchu Empire’s economy went into a deep slump in the middle of the nineteenth century, mostly because its administration had not kept up with the changing demographics and had instead stuck to its old ways.
As the rest of the world was swiftly modernizing, China retreated inside, clinging to practices and institutions that were hundreds, if not thousands, of years old. Canton was the only place in China where trading with other nations was legal, and even then only if a Chinese firm was involved.
After fifty years of unfair treaties between the Chinese Empire and foreign countries, the Boxer Rebellion broke out. In 1839, the emperor of China was so concerned about the impact of opium on his country’s people that he had British supplies in Canton destroyed. As a direct result, the British immediately began attacking, setting off the First Opium War.
China was ultimately defeated in the war, and as part of the Treaty of Nanking, five of its ports were opened to international commerce, and Hong Kong was ceded to the enemy. However, despite these benefits, the British were not content, and thus the Second Opium War erupted in 1856.
After being beaten this time, China agreed to let Christian missionaries and international delegations set up shop in 11 previously closed ports. As a result, a war was being planned against Japan while China, already weakened by the Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864), found itself more influenced by the West. As expected, Japan has progressed and become more advanced.
Thus, it did not think twice before attacking its neighbor to assert its supremacy over Korea. In April 1895, China signed the unfavorable Treaty of Shimonoseki, ceding even more territory to its enemies. The Movement of the Society of Righteous and Harmonious Fists, or the Boxer Rebellion, emerged from this time of crisis, submission, and discontent among the Chinese people.
Why Did the Hundred Days’ Reform Fail?
At the conclusion of these wars, the Russians, the French, the Germans, and the English split up China into spheres of influence.
In light of this embarrassment, the youthful emperor Guangxu surrounded himself with reformist intellectuals.
They convinced him that the only way the Empire could survive was to modernize. Although their changes were based on Western ideals, they were not well received by Empress Cixi or many other court officials.
They were set in their ways and would have none of the Western ways imposed upon them. Cixi staged a coup d’état and had the emperor locked up to put a stop to the uprising. This period is called the Hundred’ Days Reform. Guangxu was imprisoned at the Summer Palace when the empress took over the regency, and he died there in 1908.
How Does the Boxer Rebellion Start?
The empress’s actions and the ensuing outrage at the nation’s collapse served as the catalyst for the Boxer uprising. Members of the Yihetuan, a covert organization known as the “Society of Righteous and Harmonious Fists,” were known as boxers by Westerners due to their involvement in holy boxing. Invading foreign delegations and missions at Cixi’s covert request, they murdered clergymen and ultimately the German envoy, Clemens von Ketteler, in June of 1900. The imperial authority soon declared war on the Westerners and publicly backed the uprising.
What Was the Reaction of the Western Powers to the Boxer Rebellion?
Germans, Italians, French, English, Austrians, Russians, Americans, and Japanese quickly assembled an invasion force.
The forces, led by the German von Waldersee, recaptured Tianjin with relative ease and then marched on to seize Peking on August 14, 1900. The insurrection was put down after 55 days, and the empress and her court departed the city.
What Were the Results of the Boxer Rebellion?
On September 7, 1901, the imperial government signed the Peking Protocol, agreeing to compensate the Western countries to the tune of 450 million taels (about 1.6 billion gold francs) for their involvement in the revolt. The popular Boxer insurrection, which had its roots in resistance to Western economic colonialism, ultimately failed.
For China, whose economy became more dependent on Western aid, the consequences were disastrous. The Qing dynasty’s reputation was damaged even more as a result of this occurrence. All the government changes that followed were too little, too late for China, and the traditionalists and the conservatives who had been the backbone of the country’s politics for so long. It was 1911, and the revolution was about to begin.
TIMELINE OF THE BOXER REBELLION
17 April 1895 – Treaty of Shimonoseki
In the Treaty of Shimonoseki (Japan), China accepted defeat after a short war with Japan. As a result of this pact, China gave up some territory in South Manchuria, the Pescadores, and the island of Formosa (later called Taiwan). In addition, it acknowledged Japan’s de facto rule over Korea and paid hefty indemnities to the defeated nation.
At the time, Japan was planning an assault on Russia in retaliation for Russia’s obstruction of Japan’s colonial ambitions. The stage for the twentieth century’s major conflicts was set in Asia. Starting next year, the area would be divided into zones of influence by the big powers (France, Russia, the UK, and Germany).
June 11, 1898 – Beginning of the Hundred Days’ Reform
Throughout his reign as China’s emperor, Guangxu was advised by a group of reform-minded scholars and intellectuals. In an effort to fight European countries’ attempts to divide China into zones of influence, these reformers overhauled the country’s government, schools, and economy.
With her considerable court power, she stymied her nephew and emperor’s initiatives while secretly supporting the work of groups like the Yihetuan, or “Boxers.”
June 20, 1900 – Boxer Rebellion in Beijing
As a result of the presence of foreigners in China, members of the secret organization Yihetuan, “Society of Righteous and Harmonious Fists,” also known as “Boxers,” rose up in rebellion. Invading Catholic missions, besieging embassies, murdering priests, and ultimately taking the life of the German envoy, von Ketteler, were all tactics used by these men.
The colonial powers that had been in China since the Opium War of 1840 responded swiftly, prompting the departure of Empress Dowager Cixi from the capital.
July 14, 1900 – The Western army recaptured Tianjin
When the Boxer Rebellion broke out, the world powers with economic ties to China banded together to send an expeditionary force led by the German General von Waldersee to put down the uprising.
French, American, British, Russian, Austrian, German, Italian, and Japanese soldiers were also there. As an added bonus, the alliance faced little resistance when they invaded Tianjin on July 14, 1900. A month later, it would invade Beijing and put a stop to the uprising.
August 14, 1900 – End of the Boxer Rebellion
A multinational expeditionary army led by German commander Alfred von Waldersee landed in Tianjin and eventually captured the Chinese capital. After 55 days, it ended the siege of the European embassies in China by the Chinese nationalists.
The uprising that had begun against the alien presence two months earlier had finally come to an end. Cixi, the imperial grandmother, and her entourage escaped. However, a massive war indemnity was imposed on the imperial administration.
September 7, 1901 – China must compensate foreign powers
After the Boxer Rebellion gained momentum, the imperial government of China was pressured into accepting the terms of the Peking Protocol.
It had to make hefty compensation payments to hostile governments.
The shift from an agricultural-based economy to one based on automated, mass production of manufactured products began around the close of the 18th century with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Innovations in technology and the availability of alternative energies aided this process. The phenomenon of the Industrial Revolution happened at various periods in each nation, marking the beginning of a significant social mutation and the emergence of a working class. Unlike England, Germany, and the United States, France’s industrial development in the 19th century was steady and significant rather than spectacular and marked by a period of abrupt acceleration.
The Industrial Revolution saw a multitude of technological innovations, including the steam engine, spinning jenny, power loom, telegraph, and the railroad. These inventions transformed various industries and modes of communication.
England: The Pioneer
James Watt. Image: Malevus.
Beginning in late 18th-century Britain, the first industrial revolution spread around the world. Both the British economy and social structure were drastically altered. The most noticeable changes occurred in production’s basic characteristics, as well as its mode and location. The primary product sector lost workers to the manufactured goods and services sectors. The creation of more sophisticated and productive machinery, like James Watt‘s steam engine, greatly boosted the output of produced goods.
The systematic incorporation of both theoretical and empirical understanding of the manufacturing process also contributed to the productivity increase. Finally, it was found that concentrations of businesses in small areas were more productive. Thus, rural-to-urban migration and transnational movement from rural to urban places were connected to the industrial revolution.
Some of the most noticeable shifts occurred in how labor is structured. The organization grew and added new capabilities. Instead of doing so within the context of a lord’s realm or by specific family members, the company now handled production. Regularity and specialization increased as the workload increased. The utilization of capital increased dramatically in industrial output. Workers were able to crank out far more products because of the advent of cutting equipment and mechanized assembly lines. This tendency toward specialization was bolstered by the benefits of expertise in a certain activity (the production of a specific component or instrument).
Additional divisions between social classes emerged as a result of the Industrial Revolution’s increased reliance on specialized labor and massive capital investments. A large industrial and possessing bourgeoisie, owner of the means of production, whose members became known as “capitalists,” and a class of workers concentrated in manufacturing and heavy industries, who quickly formed a very homogeneous social class, brought the “social question” to the forefront of political debate at the end of the 19th century.
Prosperous Growth in the Economy
Britain was the experimental ground for a major economic and social shift since it was where the first industrial revolution took place. London was the hub of a global commercial network that facilitated the growing export of industrialization-era commodities for the majority of the 18th and 19th centuries. Exports, capitalizing on the reach of the British Empire, were critical to supporting the booming textile and industrial sectors driven by technological advances.
Exports from Britain grew rapidly after 1780, according to available statistics, and the economy did well overall. Increasing exports and access to global markets benefited the economy in two ways: first, manufacturers were able to afford the low-cost raw materials (obtained from the colonies) they needed to launch their industries, and second, export merchants gained knowledge that was instrumental in fostering the growth of domestic trade.
The “economic take-off,” as described by economist W.W. Rostow, occurred when industrialization progressed slowly over Europe. This period, which was characterized by an increase in GDP, household consumption, savings capacity, and investment, did not occur simultaneously everywhere.
In England between 1780 and 1820, in France between 1830 and 1870, and in Germany between 1850 and 1880, the population “took off,” following a period of rapid population growth due to lower mortality. Sweden and Japan experienced it at the very end of the 19th century, Russia and Canada in the early twentieth century, Latin America and Asia in the 1950s, and several regions of Africa and the Middle East decades later.
The Industrial Revolution in France
In this regard, France was in an unusual situation. From 1815 to 1860, France grew steadily but never had a true “take-off” in the 19th century. Historically, agriculture has played a larger role in the French economy than in other nations, which helps to explain why France is so far ahead of the rest of the pack. Iron output in France was obviously larger than in all of the German states combined by 1860, as the significance of industry in the growth of the industrial revolution increased from 1830 onwards.
The growth of the French railroad network from 3,000 km in 1850 to 17,500 km in 1870 and 50,000 km in 1913 was indicative of the country’s increasing industrialization. The expansion of related sectors like textiles, mining, and steel is further proof; the latter two greatly benefited from the advent of these transportation innovations, as they have been able to bring in new sources of energy, rails, wagons, etc. Thus, the French “performance” is not inconsequential, although it lagged behind England’s throughout the first two-thirds of the century and the United States and Germany’s for the final third.
The Role of the Other Countries in the Industrial Revolution
Both France and Germany faced competition from Britain as they launched industrialization, and the two countries reaped unequal benefits from the latter’s expertise. Free trade agreements between France and Britain were signed in 1860, which coincided with the slowing of the first industrial revolution in France. Due to inadequate industrialization, the French economy suffered as a result of this liberalization of trade (imports tripled, and industrial exports weakened).
Instead, the cards were reshuffled at this time, with Germany benefiting more than England as the latter country lagged behind the fast industrialization that was taking place over the Rhine (creation of large businesses, etc.). The Mediterranean region of Europe, on the other hand, was largely left out of the industrial revolution until the 20th century.
Although the British government had a significant role in fostering industrialization, it played an even larger role in Germany, Japan, Russia, and almost all other 20th-century industrializers. From this point on, the French government also started to meddle more obviously in the economy.
The Consequences of the Industrial Revolution
Heavy industry and emerging industrial sectors, like the car industry, wreaked havoc on the economies of Europe and North America. For the economy to continue operating normally, manufacturers developed modern manufacturing and administrative techniques. Fordism and Taylorism were management philosophies that emerged at the turn of the 20th century. Trusts, cartels, and an increase in the number of stockholders all contributed to a new look for the economy.
Increases in national income per capita, GNP, and GDP are the hallmarks of successful industrialization (GDP). It alters not just how resources are divided but also how people live, work, and interact with one another. Workers’ buying power and living circumstances declined during the outset of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, as they did everywhere, but ultimately improved as a consequence of general enrichment and workers’ fights.
The rise of trade unionism and Marxist socialist ideas at the century’s end led to these developments. However, the Industrial Revolution’s successful social group was the bourgeoisie, which tended to homogenize its way of life across the board, from the upper and lower classes that dominated finance and industry to the middle class that remained the norm despite its diversity.
The Industrial Revolution in a Nutshell
The advent of the new industrial age usually represents a watershed moment in human development. The effects initially appeared in England. The Industrial Revolution catapulted the nation to the position of leading economic power based on new sources of energy (coal), new materials (iron, steel), and advances (textiles, steam engines). However, a worldwide economic slump hit with the Vienna stock exchange crash of 1873.
It wasn’t until 1896 that the second Industrial Revolution, which used electricity, oil, and chemicals, began. The Great Depression of 1929 put an end to the new economy it had helped shape. To all appearances, the 20th century saw a third revolution, one that was mostly driven by technological advancements in areas such as computing, transportation, energy production, and, most notably, communication. But experts believe that it’s too early to judge it at this point.
TIMELINE OF INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION
1705: Thomas Newcomen builds a steam engine
British engineer Thomas Newcomen, in collaboration with engineer Thomas Savery, developed the first industrially usable steam engine. A few years earlier, Thomas Savery had already invented a steam engine used for pumping water. The collaboration of these two individuals led to the improvement of this device through an atmospheric engine system, or “fire pump.” Newcomen first employed it in 1712 in a mine to operate water pumps. Despite its impracticality and low efficiency, it will be significantly enhanced by engineer James Watt in the coming years.
1709: First use of coke in metallurgy
Abraham Darby, located in the English village of Coalbrookdale, succeeds in melting iron ore using coke. Coke is produced by distilling coal. The long-standing use of coal as an energy source for smelting has led to deforestation in certain European countries. Consequently, new combustion methods needed to be developed. The iron produced by Darby initially lacks quality, but over the following decades, he and his family will refine the process.
1733: John Kay perfects weaving
British inventor John Kay developed the “flying shuttle” to enhance weaving speed. This new mechanical system enables the weaving of threads at a considerable speed and in much wider fabrics, requiring less manual labor. However, the thread production rate becomes insufficient, leading engineers to seek improvements in spinning as well.
1767: The first spinning machine designed by Hargreaves
British weaver James Hargreaves invented the “Spinning jenny,” a spinning frame capable of producing eight threads simultaneously with the effort of a single person. Hargreaves patented it in 1770, leading to an increase in woven threads. However, this system requires human intervention and does not find widespread industrial use.
1769: Richard Arkwright invents the mechanical weaving machine
Richard Arkwright patents his “water frame,” a weaving machine inspired by Hargreaves but powered by a hydraulic engine. This marks the birth of the first mechanical weaving machine, signaling the end of home-based weaving. Factories must now employ personnel to operate the machines. Arkwright himself established a factory in the early 1770s.
1769: James Watt improves the steam engine
James Watt, a Scottish engineer, patented improvements to the steam engine that Newcomen and Savery created. These enhancements include a separate chamber for condensing steam to generate more energy, a double-acting system where steam itself drives the piston, and a flywheel and ball governor to adjust machine speed. Watt continued refining these improvements into the 1780s, collaborating with Matthew Boulton to mass-produce the steam engine. After 1800, further engineers contributed to enhancing the system. The steam engine, powerful and capable of significant energy production, sees increasing use in industry.
1779: Samuel Crompton perfects the weaving machine
Samuel Crompton draws inspiration from Hargreaves and Arkwright to develop his “mule-jenny,” a mechanical weaving machine capable of producing a considerable quantity of threads for all types of fibers. However, this leads to a situation where weavers struggle to keep up with production, resulting in surplus raw materials.
February 13, 1784: Henri Cort invents puddling
British inventor Henri Cort devised the puddling process, refining cast iron—reducing its carbon content—to obtain higher-quality iron or steel. In a high-temperature furnace, cast iron is stirred using a hook and oxidizing slag. This invention represents a significant advancement in metallurgy during the British Industrial Revolution.
1785: Cartwright invents the first mechanical loom
The British inventor Edmund Cartwright developed the first mechanical loom. Since Crompton’s spinning machine, thread production has far outpaced the capabilities of weavers. Cartwright’s system harmonizes raw material production with weaving.
1801: The British Parliament enacts the “General Enclosure Act”
Great Britain established a law definitively instituting enclosure in agriculture. From now on, all agricultural plots will be enclosed and private. Enclosure, implemented since the 13th century, involves fencing off land. This system began developing in the 15th century, leading to large landowners displacing peasants from commons and wastelands, ending communal agricultural exploitation in favor of individualistic production. The expelled, facing ruin, turned to other sectors of production. In the following centuries, the system expanded and, after 1760, spread throughout the country. Enclosure paved the way for commercial agriculture and resulted in the British Agricultural Revolution.
February 21, 1804: First steam locomotive trial
Richard Trevithick set the first steam locomotive in motion in England, and it eventually reached a speed of 8 km/h. Twenty years later, a passenger-carrying line opened. Rapid transportation of significant quantities of goods between different economic zones played a fundamental role in the Industrial Revolution in England.
September 28, 1825: First passenger train transport
The English mechanic and true inventor of the locomotive, George Stephenson, established the first public railway line, connecting Stockton to Darlington. England became the first country to adopt railway lines. In 1829, George Stephenson developed a locomotive that set speed records, named “the Rocket.”
August 27, 1859: Oil gushes in Pennsylvania
American Colonel Edwin Drake constructed the first oil derrick in Titusville, Pennsylvania. Precious liquid emerges when the well reaches a depth of 23 meters. Initially used for oil lamps, petroleum is also distilled for fuel. The oil boom began, leading to the emergence of desert towns and the discovery of new oil fields.
March 6, 1869: Chemistry: Mendeleev presents his periodic table of elements
Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev introduced his “periodic classification of elements” to the Russian Chemical Society. His classification of the 63 known chemical elements reveals that the chemical properties of each element repeat at regular intervals. In his table, elements in the same column exhibit comparable properties. Mendeleev’s invention revolutionized the field of chemistry, accommodating newly discovered elements in his periodic table.
May 9, 1873: Vienna stock market crash
The Vienna stock market collapsed, quickly affecting Germany and then the United States. This marks the beginning of a stagnation or economic crisis lasting until 1896. Europe and North America eventually recovered economic growth, notably due to the oil, electricity, and chemical industries. This period is referred to as the “Second Industrial Revolution.”
October 21, 1879: Edison invents the incandescent lamp
Thomas Alva Edison activated the first incandescent light bulb in his New Jersey laboratory in Melo Park. Edison’s invention uses a Japanese bamboo filament in a vacuum-sealed bulb with low voltages to produce electric light when the bamboo carbonizes. The American inventor was only 29 years old at the time. The public was amazed when his invention was presented on January 1, 1880.
January 29, 1886: Carl Benz patents the first automobile
Installing an internal combustion engine on a tricycle equipped with a gearbox and differential, Carl Benz (or Karl Benz) built what is considered the first automobile. While motorized vehicles had been constructed before, such as Joseph Cugnot’s steam farrier, Benz’s tricycle was the first complete automobile capable of commercialization and industrial production. Soon, the automobile industry will flourish, giving rise to numerous brands and models. Carl Benz will become the head of a thriving company that, through mergers, continues today under the name DaimlerChrysler.
1911: Taylor publishes “The Principles of Scientific Management”
Frederick Winslow Taylor, a German-born engineer, published a work outlining his organizational system of work. Later called “Taylorism,” it relied on the scientific organization of labor, aiming to improve the speed of employees’ execution and production. After years of analysis at his company, the Midvale Steel Corporation, he initially advocated for the separation of tasks. Managers design and schedule, while workers limit themselves to execution in assigned positions. This new method yields positive results but is not appreciated by workers, who feel transformed into mere machines.
January 14, 1914: Birth of “Fordism”
American automobile manufacturer Henry Ford introduced an innovative method of assembly line work: the assembly line. With this innovation, the Ford Model T‘s construction time dropped from 6 hours to 1.5 hours, and factory productivity increased by a factor of 4. The static worker now assembles parts passing in front of them. This marks the birth of Fordism.
October 24, 1929: Black Thursday on Wall Street
On this day, the New York Stock Exchange collapsed. In just a few hours, 12 million shares were sold on the market. Seeing the decline in prices, speculators try to quickly get rid of all their stocks. Prices plummet by 30%. The “crash” will be confirmed on Tuesday, October 29. “Black Thursday” initiated the most severe economic crisis in history, the “Great Depression” of 1929. The United States is left in ruins, and the world is impacted both politically and economically.
Catholics commemorate the Day of the Dead on November 2, a day that is not to be confused with Halloween or All Saints’ Day. Under a usually dismal sky that heralds the start of winter, the living crowd the windswept lanes of cemeteries, and chrysanthemums decorate the graves. Even though every faith has its own perspective on the afterlife, Christianity’s emphasis on the immortality of the soul and the fellowship of saints was a profound spiritual breakthrough for its time. This holiday provides a perfect time to reflect on these key tenets of Christian belief and the origins of this office of the dead, which dates back to the High Middle Ages.
The Principle of the Communion of Saints
The two events, celebrated on November 1 and 2, respectively, are connected by the Feast of All Saints. As a return to the notion of intercession within the framework of the communion of saints, the Feast of All Saints commemorates all the Christian saints, both known and unknown to the Church, and sets them up as an example for all the faithful.
The Church celebrates the broad concept of the communion of saints on the Day of the Dead. All Christians, both alive and dead, are brought together in the communion of saints, a great community of solidarity that transcends place and time.
Catholics believe that the departed who have entered God’s kingdom (such as the saints commemorated the day before) may intercede on behalf of the living. However, the other way that Catholic solidarity might flow is from the living to the dead.
Danse Macabre or Dance of Death by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1538.
Some of the dead have to go through a mysterious purification process called purgatory before they may reach God’s kingdom. A lot of people, particularly in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, had some very wild ideas about what happens in Purgatory. Some shady popes even sold “indulgences” to those hoping to reduce their own or a loved one’s time spent in purgatory. The monk Martin Luther, frustrated at being ignored, blamed this anomaly for the Church split that eventually gave rise to Protestantism.
These days, purgatory is seen more as a process of cleansing during which the prayers of the living might aid the souls of the recently departed. There is a tight connection between the concept of the communion of saints and the vision of the Church as the body of Christ made up of the baptized of all times.
Therefore, the Day of the Dead is not a macabre celebration; rather, it serves as a reminder of the continuation of the people of the baptized beyond death, the preservation of unity, and the strengthening of connections of solidarity between those who are born on Earth and those who are born in Heaven.
The Origins of the Day
Christians have always prayed for the deceased because of their faith in the soul’s immortality, but special days were set aside to do so. It is very debatable whether or not Christians really “Christianized” ancient pagan celebrations like Samhain (Halloween). There is no denying that the Day of the Dead evolved from earlier commemorations of the dead.
Even more so, this universal inquiry and this fatality, which is death, are commemorated in at least one holiday across the board, across cultures, and across faiths. But for some people, especially in Roman culture, these festivals had a more sinister purpose: to ward off the spirits of the departed. To keep them where they belong, ceremonies are done and offerings are made. The world of the dead or afterlife’s limbo once had a hopeless reputation, but this has started to change slowly with the arrival of various cults.
The early Christians had a very different perspective on death; they saw it simply as a doorway into God’s kingdom and believed that a bond could be kept alive between the living and the dead. It’s no longer a matter of appeasing the dead, but of just carrying on with their presence in your life, and the reasoning shifts dramatically. Because of this, it appears more accurate to argue that the Christian celebration of the dead succeeded the pagan celebrations rather than inheriting them. Since the beginning of winter is often associated with the beginning of death in many cultures, the dates’ coincidence serves as symbolic proof.
A Feast Dedicated to the Dead
Christians pray for the deceased on a regular basis, and very early on, a service was held just for them. Amalarius mentioned an office for the deceased as early as the year 820.
Odilo of Cluny imposed the date of November 2, the day following All Saints’ Day, on all of his monasteries in 998, presumably invoking the same concept of communion of saints.
This day first sanctioned by Pope Leo IX (1049–1054) and became a fixture in the Christian calendar. In fact, it gained so much popularity that all of Christendom adopted November 2 as the official Day of the Dead in the 13th century (at least the ones dependent on Rome, the Armenians, for example, celebrate their dead at Easter).
Many European Christians traditionally visit cemeteries on the holiday of All Saints’ Day (which falls on November 1) to place flowers on the graves of the departed. In Mexico, the celebration is given special significance via a process of syncretism in which pre-Columbian practices of honoring the deceased are kept alive.
Spanning from 1337 to 1453, the Hundred Years’ War is, in reality, a series of periods marked by conflict and peace. This clash between two powerful kingdoms, France and England, arose from a succession crisis. Upon the death of the French king Charles IV in 1328, selecting a successor proved challenging. With no male heir, the Capetian dynasty ends with him, and the crown falls to his cousin, Philip VI of Valois. However, there were several other claimants to the French throne, including Edward III Plantagenet, the deceased monarch’s nephew and the sovereign of England. Despite his legitimacy, he was excluded from the succession, prompting him to declare war against Philip VI in 1337.
The conflict, confined to the continent, ravaged France for 116 years. Following English victories at Battle of Crécy (1346) and Battle of Poitiers (1356), the English gained the upper hand. In the Treaty of Brétigny (1360), the King of France was compelled to cede numerous territories. From 1369 to 1380, Charles V of France reconquered part of his kingdom. The civil war between the Armagnacs and Bourguignons, starting in 1407, once again weakened the French monarchy.
The English king regained the advantage, winning the Battle of Agincourt (1415). The Treaty of Troyes (1420), in which the French king designated the English king as his heir, was signed. Just when the war seemed lost, the French rebounded under the leadership of Joan of Arc and through numerous uprisings against the occupier. The conflict came to an end at the Battle of Castillon, which Charles VII of France won in 1453. Compelled to sign the Treaty of Picquigny (1475), the English were thus “driven out of France,” losing all their territories.
What Were the Causes of the Hundred Years’ War?
The Battle of Agincourt, 15th-century miniature, Enguerrand de Monstrelet.
The Hundred Years’ War originated from intense tensions between France and England over various territories, including the Duchy of Guyenne (Aquitaine), which had been under English control since the marriage of Eleanor of Aquitaine to the King of England. Additionally, in 1328, Charles IV died without a male heir, leading to Philip VI of France ascending to the throne. As the nephew of the deceased monarch, Edward III asserted his rights to the French crown, tracing his lineage through his mother to King Philip IV of France.
To prevent the Kingdom of France from falling into the hands of the King of England, French jurists invoked an ancient Frankish custom known as the Salic Law. According to this legal code, women and their descendants were excluded from the succession to the French throne. Edward III was definitively excluded from the succession.
Nevertheless, he persisted in claiming his rights to the crown and declared himself the King of France and England. The Hundred Years’ War truly began in 1337, when Philippe VI seized Guyenne. Edward III then landed on the continent to confront the King of France.
When Did the Hundred Years’ War Take Place?
The Hundred Years’ War began on May 24, 1337, when Philip VI took control of Guyenne with the intention of punishing the King of England for his claims. Edward III was indeed the vassal of the King of France for the Duchy of Guyenne. On October 7, 1337, Edward of England openly defied the King of France and claimed “his” crown.
In July 1339, Philip VI’s troops unsuccessfully besieged Bordeaux, the capital of English Aquitaine. This marked the start of over a century of conflicts between the two royal families. After the intervention of Joan of Arc, the tide of the Hundred Years’ War turned in favor of France. It concluded in 1453 with the Battle of Castillon. On August 29, 1475, the Treaty of Picquigny definitively ended this century-long conflict.
How Long Did the Hundred Years’ War Last?
The Hundred Years’ War spanned from 1337 to 1453, actually lasting 116 years. Over several generations, the two major powers, France and England, contested for control over the French kingdom. Numerous confrontations occurred during this century, such as the renowned battles of Crécy, Agincourt, and Castillon, along with periods of peace.
This era was also marked by internal conflicts in France, including the War of the Breton Succession, the Great Jacquerie, or the civil war between the Armagnacs and Burgundians. Similar conflicts unfolded in England, where the House of Lancaster seized power. In total, ten English and French sovereigns were successively involved in the conflict.
How Did Joan of Arc Impact the Hundred Years’ War?
In the early 15th century, following the Battle of Agincourt, Charles VI, the mad king, retained only half of France. A civil war between the Burgundians and the Armagnacs tore the nation apart. This tumultuous period allowed the English king to reaffirm his claims to the French kingdom. Through the Treaty of Troyes (1420), he became the heir to Charles VI. However, around 1425, a young girl claimed to hear voices and received a divine mission: to free France from an English invasion and place Charles VII on the throne of France.
Convinced of her chosen status, Joan of Arc enlisted in the dauphin’s army. She quickly achieved a series of resounding victories, becoming an inspiring icon for the soldiers. Before being captured by the English at Compiègne in 1430, Joan of Arc witnessed the coronation of Charles VII in Reims.
This “divine” intervention allowed the French to turn the tide against England. Paris was recaptured in 1436, and the Battle of Castillon in 1453 marked the end of the Hundred Years’ War.
What Were the Results of the Hundred Years’ War?
A Medieval depiction of the Siege of Calais.
The repercussions, particularly economic and geopolitical, of the Hundred Years’ War are considerable. Defeated at the Battle of Castillon in 1453, England lost its French possessions, with the exception of Calais. The Plantagenet dynasty emerged weakened from the conflict and became embroiled in a bloody civil war, the War of the Roses (1455–1485). France, on the other hand, reclaimed Guyenne and Normandy, but famine and epidemics like the Black Death decimated its population.
A new tax, the taille, was instituted to support the country’s expenses. The Hundred Years’ War also witnessed significant military developments, whether in terms of military strategy, weapons (artillery, bows, pikes, etc.), or the types of combatants. The conflict ultimately contributes to the construction of strong national identities in both countries.
Timeline of the Hundred Years’ War
February 1, 1328: Death of Charles IV the Fair
The King of France, Charles IV the Fair, died at Vincennes without a male heir. His wife, Jeanne d’Evreux, was pregnant, but she would give birth to a daughter. The throne of France passed to his nephew, Philippe de Valois, who will take the name Philippe VI. Charles IV was the last of the direct Capetians. Upon his death, the crown goes to the Valois branch of the Capetians.
May 24, 1337: Start of the Hundred Years’ War
Refusing to pay homage to the King of France for his Duchy of Guyenne, Edward III of England also claimed the French throne. He was, in fact, the grandson of Philip the Fair through his mother. Philippe VI of France had no choice but to confiscate Guyenne from his disloyal vassal in 1337.
October 7, 1337: Edward III Claims the Throne of France
After the seizure of Guyenne by Philippe VI, Edward III of England publicly challenged the legitimacy of his cousin’s claim to the throne on October 7, 1337, at Westminster Abbey. After years of tension, the situation escalates between the two age-old enemies. This marks the beginning of a century of conflicts between the Valois and Plantagenet dynasties.
December 28, 1337: Revolution in the County of Flanders
The County of Flanders, a principality of the Kingdom of France heavily involved in the conflicts between France and England during the Hundred Years’ War, experienced a revolution on December 28, 1337. The King of England, using economic leverage, encouraged the inhabitants of Ghent, the capital of the county, to revolt against the French. They self-managed until 1345 and supported neutrality in the Franco-English conflict under Jacob van Artevelde’s leadership.
January 23, 1340: Edward III of England Claims the Title of King of France in Ghent Upon the death of King Charles IV of France in 1328, the throne should have passed to the last living descendant of Philip the Fair, King Edward III of England. However, he was ousted in favor of his distant cousin, Philip VI of Valois. In 1337, Edward III of England declared himself the legitimate heir to the French throne, triggering the Hundred Years’ War. On January 23, 1340, he claimed the title of King of France in Ghent, following the revolution in the County of Flanders.
June 23, 1340: The Naval Battle of Sluys
Philip VI of France, as imagined in the 19th century.
On June 24, 1340, the Battle of Sluys, the first naval battle of the Hundred Years’ War, took place between the ships of King Edward III of England, claiming the French crown, and the fleet of King Philip VI of France. This battle, in the North Sea near Belgium, was won by the English forces, while the French armada was annihilated. Several thousand men perished in the battle, most by drowning.
September 25, 1340: The Truce of Esplechin-sur-Escaut
Despite winning the Battle of Sluys in June 1340, King Edward III of England found himself in a difficult position. Financially drained, he can no longer pay his allies, and his troops face serious setbacks in other theaters of operation. Taking advantage of his absence, the Scots launched a revolt against the English forces. Compelled, the sovereign signed a temporary truce with the King of France, the Truce of Esplechin-sur-Escaut, on September 25, 1340.
September 7, 1341: Philip VI Supports Charles de Blois for the Succession of the Duchy of Brittany
At the beginning of the Hundred Years’ War, another succession war erupted in Brittany between Charles de Blois, a supporter of King Philip VI of France, and Jean de Montfort, a supporter of King Edward III of England. Philip VI of Valois naturally supported Charles de Blois, formalizing this position with a decree from the Court of Peers in Conflans on September 7, 1341.
September 26, 1345: Death of Jean de Montfort
Jean de Montfort, a claimant to the Duchy of Brittany from 1341 to 1345 during the War of the Breton Succession, amidst the Hundred Years’ War, was an ally of King Edward III against King Philip VI of Valois. Captured by the army of John the Good in late 1341, he was imprisoned in Paris for nearly four years. In March 1345, he manages to escape and resumes the fight, but he falls ill and dies on September 26, 1345.
August 26, 1346: French Defeat at Crécy
Devastating the provinces near the English Channel, the troops of Edward III clashed with those of Philip VI. Led by the two sovereigns, the French and English hosts faced each other on August 26, 1346, during the famous Battle of Crécy-en-Ponthieu (Picardy). A bloody confrontation ensued, in which the French army was decimated. Archery plays a crucial role in defeating both the cavalry and infantry.
September 4, 1346: Beginning of the Siege of Calais
During the Hundred Years’ War, King Philip VI of France and King Edward III of England vied for the French crown. In 1346, Edward III launched a military campaign on French soil. English troops landed in Normandy in July, then moved north and reached Calais on September 4, 1346. This marked the start of the Siege of Calais, lasting 11 months until the English victory. The city remained under British rule for two centuries.
October 17, 1346: David II of Scotland Invades England
On October 17, 1346, David II of Scotland invaded England to defend the interests of France, as per the terms of the Auld Alliance. This “old alliance” between Scotland and France stipulated that if one state were attacked by England, the other state must invade England in turn. Under this treaty, Scottish troops crossed the border but were defeated in the Battle of Neville’s Cross. King David II of Scotland was captured and imprisoned for 11 years.
June 18, 1347: The Battle of La Roche-Derrien
Charles de Blois, Duke of Brittany, is taken prisoner after the battle of La Roche-Derrien.
The Battle of La Roche-Derrien was one of the early battles of the War of the Breton Succession, part of the Hundred Years’ War, between French and English forces vying for the French crown. France lost this battle, and English troops captured Charles de Blois, the claimant to the Duchy of Brittany, supported by King Philip VI of Valois. He would only be released in 1356, after nine years of captivity.
August 3, 1347: Calais Surrenders to the King of England
The English army was occupying Calais ten years after the Hundred Years’ War started. Following their overwhelming victory at Crécy, Edward III sought to strengthen his control over Northern France. He then launched his troops on the city in September 1346. After eleven months of siege, plagued by hunger and without hope of reinforcements, the city surrendered on August 3, 1347. Calais would only return to French hands two centuries later. In 1895, Rodin would sculpt “The Burghers of Calais,” depicting the surrender of the city.
1348: Foundation of the Order of the Garter
The Order of the Garter was a British chivalric order founded in 1348 by King Edward III of England, in the midst of the Hundred Years’ War. This order brought together 25 knights around the sovereign, known as “companions,” and was intended to support Edward III in his claim to the French throne. The Order of the Garter still exists today, and being part of it was a great honor, according to the customs of British royalty.
August 22, 1350: Death of Philip VI of France
Philippe de Valois, King of France since 1328, died on August 22, 1350. His accession to the throne resulted from a political choice to exclude the legitimate heir, King Edward III of England. The reign of Philip VI of France was marked by the early stages of the Hundred Years’ War, the War of the Breton Succession, and the arrival of the Black Death in France. At his death, he left to his son John II of France a disorganized and coveted kingdom.
September 26, 1350: Coronation of John II of France
King Philip de Valois died on August 22, 1350, and his son John II of France, known as “John the Good” succeeded him. He will be crowned and anointed a month later, on September 26. Facing the distrust of the population due to the severe defeats of the Hundred Years’ War and the conspiracies of Charles II of Navarre, a pretender to the throne, he ruled in isolation, surrounded only by his closest advisers.
March 25, 1351: Battle of the Thirty
In Ploërmel, during the War of the Breton Succession, 30 Bretons loyal to Charles de Blois faced off against 30 English soldiers from the army of Jean de Montfort following a challenge. The French, led by Beaumanoir, emerged victorious. The account of this unique battle would later be chronicled by the French historian Froissart.
January 6, 1352: Establishment of the Order of the Star
Modeled after the English Order of the Garter, King John II le Bon of France created the first French chivalric order, the Order of the Star. The inauguration ceremony took place in Saint-Ouen.
August 14, 1352: Battle of Mauron
During the War of Succession in Brittany, the Battle of Mauron on August 14, 1352, pitted Anglo-Breton forces supporting Jean de Montfort against Franco-Breton forces supporting Charles de Blois. The fortified city of Mauron held a strategic position for controlling Brittany. Despite being outnumbered, the troops of Jean de Montfort, aided by English archers, emerged victorious.
February 22, 1354: Treaty of Mantes
The Treaty of Mantes, signed on February 22, 1354, between John II of France and Charles II of Navarre, aimed to secure the French kingdom against Navarre’s alignment with England during the ongoing Hundred Years’ War. The treaty favored Charles II of Navarre, granting him ownership of numerous territories in France.
September 10, 1355: Treaty of Valognes
In 1354, John II of France and Charles II of Navarre signed a peace treaty in Mantes to secure Navarre’s support for France during the Hundred Years’ War. However, this initial treaty was short-lived, as the King of Navarre quickly allied with England. In an effort to change his stance, the King of France proposed a new treaty, the Treaty of Valognes, even more generous than the previous one.
September 19, 1356: Battle of Poitiers
The French army suffered a crushing defeat by English archers in the second major battle of the Hundred Years’ War after Crécy. King John II the Good and his son, Philippe le Hardi, were captured. The Black Prince, the eldest son of Edward III of England, escorted them to Bordeaux.
March 23, 1357: Truce of Bordeaux
On March 23, 1357, the truce of Bordeaux was signed between France and England. Lasting for one year, it marked the fourth truce since the start of the Hundred Years’ War. Negotiations between the captive John II the Good and the Black Prince failed due to the opposition of Edward III. While the truce was signed, the King of France remained imprisoned in England for three years.
June 9, 1358: Battle of Mello of the Great Jacquerie
The Great Jacquerie, a peasant uprising during the Hundred Years’ War against the nobility, was suppressed on June 9, 1358, by Charles le Mauvais. In the Battle of Mello, knights killed 7,000 peasants, committing a massacre in retaliation. Apart from the leader, Guillaume Carle, killed by treachery, records mention the execution of 20,000 rebels in two weeks.
July 31, 1358: Death of Étienne Marcel
Étienne Marcel, provost of the merchants of Paris under Jean Le Bon, died in Paris on July 31, 1358. Leading the reformist movement for a controlled monarchy in 1357, he opposed the Dauphin’s power, particularly in the various estates-general of the Hundred Years’ War, where he represented the Third Estate. He was assassinated by the bourgeois, fearing that his opposition to the Dauphin would lead to the surrender of Paris to the English.
March 10, 1360: Treaty of Guillon
On March 10, 1360, Philippe de Rouvres, Duke of Burgundy, and King Edward III of England signed the Treaty of Guillon, also known as the “Treaty of the Golden Sheep.” The defeated Burgundians agreed to pay 200,000 gold deniers, with the payment guaranteed by voluntary hostages and the free movement of the English in their territory. In return, the duchy was liberated from English troops, which marched toward Paris.
May 8, 1360: Franco-English Peace of Brétigny
During the Hundred Years’ War (1337–1453), preliminary peace treaty terms between the kings of France and England were signed in Brétigny (Eure-et-Loir) on May 8, 1360. King John II the Good, captured by the English in 1356, ceded territories in the north between Calais and Ponthieu and in the south, Aquitaine. King Edward III received the ransom of 4 to 3 million écus and renounced his claim to the throne of France. The conflict between the two countries would resume nine years later.
April 6, 1362: Battle of the Mercenaries at Brignais
The Battle of Brignais on April 6, 1362, pitted mercenary companies against the French royal army. Mercenaries, unpaid during the truce of the Hundred Years’ War, ravaged the countryside, angering the king. The Tard-Venus, one of these companies, defeated the royal army south of Lyon, killing several barons, including Jacques de Bourbon. While this defeat caused panic in the kingdom, the lack of unity among the mercenaries and campaigns in Spain and Hungary, where they were sent, ended their movement.
July 19, 1362: Foundation of the Principality of Aquitaine
On July 19, 1362, Edward III, King of England, established Guyenne as the Principality of Aquitaine, placing his son Edward at its helm. The Prince of Wales, known as the Black Prince, ruled over a territory acquired by the English in 1360 through the Treaty of Brétigny. The principalities of Aquitaine would be reconquered between 1369 and 1372 by the Duke of Anjou, brother of King Charles V.
April 8, 1364: Death of John the Good
The King of France died in London at the age of 45. The sovereign had gone to negotiate the Brétigny agreements with King Edward III of England. His death dashed hopes for peace, as the French and English had been at war for over two decades. John II the Good’s son, Charles V le Sage, was proclaimed King of France.
May 19, 1364: Coronation of Charles V
Charles V of France was crowned king in Reims on May 19, 1364. His reign coincided with the end of the first phase of the Hundred Years’ War, as Charles the Wise reclaimed most of the territories lost to the English and restored the authority of the state. Through policies of apanages and sustainable taxes, he established a permanent army to eliminate reliance on mercenaries and diplomatically isolated the English through alliances with the Gascons. Charles V died in 1380.
September 29, 1364: Battle of Auray
The Battle of Auray on September 29, 1364, concluded the War of Succession in Brittany, a part of the Hundred Years’ War. It pitted the Anglo-Breton army of Jean IV de Montfort against Franco-Breton troops. Charles de Blois perished in the battle, Bertrand du Guesclin was captured, and the French defeat settled the succession conflict. Charles V acknowledged, through the Treaty of Guérande the following year, that Jean IV of Brittany was the duke.
April 3, 1367: Du Guesclin Captured by the Black Prince
Bertrand du Guesclin was captured by the Black Prince during the Battle of Najera in Navarre. The Prince of Wales, known as the Black Prince, imprisoned the future constable in Bordeaux, where French envoys negotiated his release. Du Guesclin was freed on January 17, 1368.
December 3, 1368: Birth of Charles VI
Charles VI of France was born in Paris to Charles V and Jeanne de Bourbon on December 3, 1368. He ascended to the throne at the age of 12, becoming the fourth king of the Capetian House of Valois. Until he reached the majority, his uncles (Louis de Bourbon, Louis 1st of Anjou, Jean de Berry, and Philippe de Bourgogne) would act as regents. Charles VI ruled over the Kingdom of France until his death on October 21, 1422.
March 14, 1369: Battle of Montiel
The Battle of Montiel in Castile-La Mancha, Spain, unfolded during the Hundred Years’ War. It pitted pro-English forces led by Portugal against the supporters of Peter I, known as “the Cruel,” aligned with the kingdoms of France and Castile. The conflict ended with the victory of the pro-English alliance, concluding the first war of Castile. A few days later, it was ultimately Henry II who seized the throne of Castile after killing his half-brother, Peter I.
October 2, 1369: Du Guesclin Appointed Constable
King Charles V the Wise conferred the title of constable upon the knight Bertrand du Guesclin on October 2, 1369. He thus became the supreme commander of the French army. The King of France rewarded him for his services during the war against the English. Du Guesclin remained loyal to the king and fought for the Kingdom of France until he died in 1380.
December 4, 1370: Battle of Pontvallain
The Battle of Pontvallain took place on December 4, 1370, in retaliation for a series of raids, particularly in northern France and Beauce. It saw the English forces led by Robert Knolles and Thomas Granson clash with the French forces of Bertrand du Guesclin, Olivier de Clisson, and Jean de Vienne in the County of Maine. The latter emerged victorious, capturing numerous prisoners.
March 15, 1371: Siege of Bressuire
The French forces, commanded by Bertrand du Guesclin, confronted the English at Bressuire in Poitou as a pivotal engagement within the context of the Hundred Years’ War. This decisive encounter resulted in the French reclaiming both the city and its fortress, along with the entirety of Poitou. The strategic application of a series of sieges, including Bécherel, Guérande, Soubise, and others, bore fruit, culminating in Charles V regaining Aunis and Saintonge by the conclusion of 1373.
June 22, 1372: Battle of La Rochelle
Naval battle of La Rochelle, 1372.
The fleets of the Franco-Castilian alliance engaged the English forces off the coast of La Rochelle on June 22, 1372. This territory had been under English control since the Treaty of Brétigny in 1360. Continuing his preference for siege tactics over open-field battles, Constable Bertrand du Guesclin, leading the Franco-Castilian forces, successfully penetrated the city the following day. Simultaneously, they dismantled the Vauclair castle to construct the Gabut wall.
March 12, 1376: Extension of the Truce of Bruges
The Truce of Bruges (Treaty of Bruges), initially signed on June 27, 1375, lasting for one year during the second phase of the Hundred Years’ War, saw an extension until June 24, 1377. Subsequent negotiations between the advisors of the French and English monarchs were futile due to Edward III’s refusal. His demise on June 21, 1377, marked the resumption of hostilities.
July 16, 1377: Coronation of Richard II of England
Following the death of Edward III, Richard II ascended to the English throne on July 16, 1377, becoming the eighth monarch of the Plantagenet dynasty at the age of 10. However, due to his youth, a regency was established by his uncles, namely John of Gaunt, Edmund of Langley, and Thomas of Woodstock. Richard II retained the throne until September 29, 1399, when he willingly relinquished it to Henry IV of Lancaster.
July 13, 1380: Death of Bertrand du Guesclin
Bertrand Du Guesclin succumbed to illness during the siege of Châteauneuf-de-Randon on July 13, 1380. Engaged in numerous conflicts such as the Hundred Years’ War, War of the Breton Succession, and the First Castilian Civil War in service to Navarre and France, Du Guesclin acquired several titles during his illustrious career, including captain of Pontorson and Mont Saint-Michel, Duke of Longueville in Normandy, King of Grenade, and Duke of Molina.
September 16, 1380: Death of Charles V
Charles V passed away in Beauté-sur-Marne on September 16, 1380, amidst a plague epidemic. Born on January 21, 1338, in Vincennes to John II, known as the Good, and Bonne of Luxembourg, he reigned as the King of France from 1364 until his demise. Charles V, during the Hundred Years’ War, successfully reclaimed most of the lands lost by his predecessors, reinstating the authority of the state. His reign witnessed initiatives in decentralizing power and instituting a new economic order.
November 4, 1380: Coronation of Charles VI
Charles VI was crowned King of France in Reims on November 4, 1380, becoming the fourth king of the Valois branch of the Capetian dynasty. Given his tender age of 12, a collegiate system of government was instituted, and it took until 1388 for him to assume effective control. His rule endured until his death on October 21, 1422, marked by the Armagnac-Burgundian civil war and the ongoing Hundred Years’ War.
August 5, 1392: Charles VI Descends Into Madness
At the age of 24, King Charles VI experienced a bout of madness while traversing the forest of Le Mans with his troops. Convinced he saw enemies surrounding him, he impulsively attacked, resulting in the deaths of six knights. His reign from 1380 to 1422 witnessed 44 episodes of insanity lasting 3–9 months each. This period also saw aristocratic factions, divided between the Duke of Orleans and the Duke of Burgundy, vying for supremacy.
April 28, 1393: Truce of Leulinghem
Signed on April 28, 1393, the Truce of Leulinghem, originally established during the ongoing Hundred Years’ War, was extended for the first time until September 29, 1394. This truce stipulated an obligation not to construct any town or fortress within seven leagues of a town on the opposing side. Initially intended for three years, the truce underwent subsequent extensions.
July 11, 1397: Thomas of Woodstock Accused of Treason and Arrested
On July 11, 1397, Thomas of Woodstock, uncle to Richard II of England, faced accusations of treason and was subsequently arrested. His criticism of the new truce between France and England, coupled with the king’s marriage to Isabella of Valois, daughter of the French King Charles VI, led to his arrest. Less than two months later, Thomas of Woodstock was executed without trial, accused solely of treason.
September 30, 1399: Henry of Lancaster Becomes King of England
On September 30, 1399, after capturing King Richard II, Henry of Lancaster, son of John of Gaunt, declared himself the new King of England as Henry IV. Crowned on October 13 of the same year, Henry IV ruled until 1413, the year of his death. Nicknamed “Henry Bolingbroke” due to his birth at Bolingbroke Castle, he also founded the House of Lancaster.
February 14, 1400: Murder of Former King Richard II of England
Facing public discontent and his increasingly tyrannical behavior, Richard II of England relinquished his crown to Henry Bolingbroke, the future Henry IV, on September 29, 1399. Confined in the Tower of London, Richard II died on February 14, 1400, under suspicious circumstances—likely assassinated or due to deprivation of food by his jailers. His reign, characterized by attempts to mitigate warlike disputes with France, foreshadowed the emergence of an absolute monarchy in England.
February 22, 1403: Birth of Charles VII, Future King of France
Charles VII, born on February 22, 1403, was the fifth son of Charles VI and Isabeau of Bavaria. He became the only dauphin to reach adulthood. Disinherited by his father in favor of the King of England and battered by the Hundred Years’ War, his life took a decisive turn with the intervention of Joan of Arc. Charles VII ultimately concluded the protracted war with England.
April 27, 1404: Death of Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy
Philip the Bold, born in Pontoise in 1342, passed away in Hal (County of Hainaut) on April 27, 1404. Distinguished during the Hundred Years’ War, his boldness at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356 earned him his epithet and the enjoyment of his Burgundian domain. As Duke of Burgundy since 1363 and Count of Flanders, he left the responsibilities of his heritage to his son, John the Fearless (1371–1419), sparking a power struggle with Louis of Orleans and plunging France into civil war with the Armagnacs.
November 23, 1407: Assassination of Louis of Orleans
John the Fearless orchestrated the assassination of Duke Louis of Orleans on November 23, 1407, as he exited the Hôtel Barbette on Vieille-du-Temple Street in Paris. The Duke of Burgundy sought to unite Artois and Flanders with his duchy, but Louis I of Orleans, cousin and son of King Charles V, opposed this endeavor. Eliminating his rival, John the Fearless initiated a bloody civil war between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians, concluding 30 years later with the signing of the Treaty of Arras in 1435.
March 9, 1409: Peace of Chartres, a Ceasefire Between Armagnacs and Burgundians
The Peace of Chartres was signed on March 9, 1409, temporarily halting the civil war between the Armagnacs and Burgundians. Among the 21 articles signed by Lord Jean de Montaigu, close to King Charles VI, Duke John the Fearless (1371–1419) acknowledged the murder of Louis I of Orleans (1407) and extended apologies to his children, Philip and Charles. A reconciliation ceremony was organized on the same day in Chartres Cathedral, where the successors of Orleans forgave the assassin of their father.
March 20, 1413: Death of Henry IV of England
Henry IV of England, born in 1367 in Bolingbroke (Lincolnshire), passed away in Westminster on March 20, 1413. The son of John of Gaunt and grandson of Edward III, he was crowned in 1399, establishing the Lancastrian dynasty. Banished by Richard II, Henry IV successfully quelled feudal opposition, forcing his adversary to abdicate in his favor. During his reign, he brutally suppressed Welsh and Scottish independence revolts. His son, Henry V (1387–1422), succeeded him.
April 9, 1413: Coronation of Henry V of England
On April 9, 1413, Henry V of England (1387–1422) was crowned at Westminster Abbey. Exploiting the turmoil in a France torn apart by civil war, he allied with the Burgundians, led by John the Fearless. Emerging victorious over the Armagnacs at Agincourt (October 25, 1415), he imposed the Treaty of Troyes (1420) after the conquest of Normandy, securing regency and the appanage of the Kingdom of France. He married Charles VI’s daughter, Catherine de Valois, and died of dysentery in Vincennes on August 31 at the age of 35.
August 13, 1415: Henry V’s Landing in Normandy
Allied with the Duke of Burgundy, John the Fearless, the King of England, Henry V, landed in Normandy at Chef-de-Caux (Seine estuary) with a fleet of 1500 ships, heavy artillery, and 30,000 men. This led to the siege of Harfleur (August 18), which fell a month later (September 22). The conquest campaign of France reached its peak with the English victory over the Armagnacs at the Battle of Agincourt (October 25, 1415).
October 25, 1415: Battle of Agincourt
The English forces of King Henry V defeated the French army at Agincourt, north of the Somme. Stuck in the mud, the French nobility’s horses couldn’t counter the English archers. Many knights were captured. Despite numerical superiority (50,000 against 15,000 English), the French were too disorganized. Agincourt stands as one of the deadliest battles of the Middle Ages. Following this victory, Henry V seized control of Normandy.
August 1, 1417: Henry V’s Landing
Henry V of England landed his troops at the mouth of the Touques (now Trouville): 10,000 men and artillery. Immediately, the siege of the castle began, which fell on the 9th. The English advance was unstoppable, and Norman citadels surrendered one after another: Lisieux, Dives, on the 13th; Auvillars, on the 14th; and Eterville, on the 17th. Caen was besieged on August 18. Then Bayeux (September 15), Alençon (October 12), and Falaise (November). Only Mont-Saint-Michel resisted.
September 19, 1417: Capitulation of Caen
After a month-long siege, the castle of Caen surrendered to Henry V’s troops, who made it his headquarters. The Normandy campaign lasted two years until December 1419 and the capture of Château-Gaillard. After the victory over the Armagnacs at Agincourt (1415), Normandy was now under English control. Henry V imposed the Treaty of Troyes (May 21, 1420) on Charles VI the Mad, making him the future king of France and England.
July 29, 1418: Start of the Siege of Rouen by Henry V
The English camped outside Rouen, which fell after six months of a long and arduous siege that claimed 35,000 lives (January 19, 1419), or half of its population. The capture of the capital of the Duchy of Normandy was the highlight of the campaign, opening the route to the Kingdom of France for Henry V of England, who made his lordly castle his residence. It was only in 1449 that Rouen returned to French control under Charles VII’s auspices.
September 16, 1418: The Dauphin Rejects the Bourguignons’ Overture
The Treaty of Saint-Maur was signed between John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, and Isabeau of Bavaria, wife of Charles VI the Mad. In an attempt at reconciliation, this treaty stipulates that the dauphin, future Charles VII (1403–1461), was appointed regent of France due to his father’s insanity but was himself placed under Burgundian guardianship. The young Charles vehemently rejects the text.
July 11, 1419: Peace of Ponceau between John the Fearless and the Dauphin
In 1419, the Oath of Pouilly (or “Peace of Ponceau”) was sworn between John the Fearless and the dauphin, the future Charles VII. Disappointed by his meeting with Henry V of England, the Duke of Burgundy then opts for a rapprochement with the King of France. An appointment was agreed upon on the bridge of Montereau (Yonne), and an encounter was aborted due to the assassination of John the Fearless by close advisers of the Dauphin.
September 10, 1419: Assassination of John the Fearless
A close friend of Dauphin Charles, the heir to the French throne, assassinated John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, in Montereau amid the Hundred Years’ War. Twelve years later, he was convinced to avenge the murder of Louis of Orléans. The murder reignites the conflict between Armagnacs and Burgundians, dividing the already weakened French after the defeat at Agincourt. Charles VI the Mad, Charles’ father, disinherited him in 1420. He will have to wait ten years for a certain Joan of Arc to help him regain the French throne.
May 21, 1420: The Treaty of Troyes
The Duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, and the King of England, Henry V, signed the Treaty of Troyes (Aube), which delivered France to the English. Indeed, by this treaty, Henry V obtained the crown of France as the heir of Charles VI the Mad. The treaty also provided for the marriage of Henry V to Catherine de Valois, daughter of Charles VI, to legitimize this succession. Their son, the future Henry VI of England, was born on December 6, 1421.
The Treaty of Troyes was the result of the French defeat at Agincourt (October 25, 1415) and the division of the kingdom between the Burgundians and the Armagnacs. Charles VI now ruled only the southern half of France; his council and court were itinerant, and his illness prevented him from ruling alone. Charles VII attempted to secure regency, but by this treaty, he was excluded from the succession.
June 2, 1420: Catherine de Valois Becomes Queen Consort of England
Catherine de Valois married Henry V on June 2, 1420, at the church of Saint-Jean-du-Marché in Troyes. From their union, Henry VI, the future King of England, was born in 1421.
December 6, 1421: Birth of Henry VI of England
From the union of Henry V and Catherine de Valois, Henry VI was born at Windsor Castle on December 6 (assassinated in London in 1471), the future King of England. He was quickly called to the throne, reigning first under the guardianship of his uncles, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, and John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford (for France, until his coronation in 1431). After the War of the Roses, Edward IV deposed him (1461).
August 31, 1422: Premature Death of Henry V, King of England
At the height of his reign, but without being able to wear the crown of France, Henry V of England died at the age of 35 from dysentery at Vincennes Castle. Along with Emperor Sigismund, he deserves credit for ending the Great Western Schism with the election of Martin V. Buried with great pomp at Westminster Abbey, his tragic demise inspired Shakespeare’s eponymous play.
October 21, 1422: Death of the King of France, Charles VI the Mad
Charles VI the Mad died in Paris two months after the King of England, whom he had named as his heir through the Treaty of Troyes. Unable to govern due to increasingly frequent and pronounced bouts of madness, the King of France finally made way for his dauphin, the future Charles VII.
October 30, 1422: Charles VII Confers the Title of King of France
Ignoring the Treaty of Troyes (1420), which disinherits him in favor of Henry V of England, Charles VII proclaimed himself King of France in Mehun-sur-Yèvre (near Bourges), in place of the legitimate successor, the very young Henry VI. However, Charles VII was crowned King of France only in Reims in 1429, thanks to Joan of Arc. Major political reorganizations and commercial growth would characterize his reign.
April 17, 1423: Alliance between the Dukes of Burgundy, Brittany, and the English against Charles VII
In Amiens, the Duke of Bedford, who oversees the regency of the English throne on behalf of the very young Henry VI, signs a triple alliance with the Dukes John V of Brittany and Philip of Burgundy, known as the Treaty of Amiens. Despite the Treaty of Troyes (1420), Charles VII, who had withdrawn to Bourges, plans to reconquer the lands north of the Loire, largely occupied by the English.
July 3, 1423: Birth of Louis XI, Son and Heir of Charles VII
Louis XI, the future king of France, was born in Bourges, from the union of Marie d’Anjou and Charles VII. He was the sixth king of the Valois branch of the Capetians. Louis XI, also known as “the prudent,” inherited in 1461 a kingdom devastated by the Hundred Years’ War and the bloody civil war between Armagnacs and Burgundians. He strengthened royal authority by bringing the major feudal lords of the Kingdom of France under control: Maine, Anjou, Provence, and Burgundy.
July 31, 1423: Defeated by the English, Charles VII Retreats to Bourges
The English army and their Burgundian allies defeated the soldiers of Charles VII in the Battle of Cravant (Yonne). Hostilities in the Hundred Years’ War resumed after the Treaty of Troyes (1420), which disinherits the Dauphin. Occupying the north of the Loire, the numerically superior English force compelled Charles VII to a defensive retreat to the south, which he still governs. He then acquired the nickname “King of Bourges.”
September 26, 1423: French Victory Over the English at La Gravelle
Charles VII’s French forces, led by the knight Ambroise de Loré and Captain Jean VII d’Harcourt, decisively defeated the English under William de la Pole in the Battle of La Brossinière (Mayenne), sometimes called the Battle of La Gravelle. Just as the Hundred Years’ War had resumed, this glorious victory signals the turning point in the conflict and remains a “happy omen” for Charles VII.
August 17, 1424: Charles VII’s Defeat Against the English at Verneuil
The regent of England, the Duke of Bedford, allied with the Burgundians and defeated Charles VII’s French forces in the Battle of Verneuil (Normandy). The “Dauphin’s” army was unable to fend off the onslaught of English archers under John of Lancaster’s command, despite the assistance of a Scottish contingent. Known for its archery duel, the defeat at Verneuil led to the loss of 6,000 French soldiers (out of the 12,000 present).
May 1, 1426: Convocation of the Estates-General by Yolande d’Aragon
The Queen of Sicily, Yolande d’Aragon (1381–1442), stepmother of the young Charles VII, convenes the Estates-General in Saumur. Operating in the interests of the Valois and as a guardian of the prerogatives of her protege, Charles VII, she signed a treaty with the Duke of Brittany, Jean V, urging him to break his alliance with the English, already allies of the Burgundians. She encourages the duke’s brother, Arthur de Richemont, appointed constable in 1425, to support her cause.
February 8, 1427: Arrest of Pierre de Giac, a Former Favorite of Charles VII
The knight and lord Pierre de Giac (born in 1377), a favorite of King Charles VII, was arrested in Issoudun on the orders of Constable Arthur de Richemont and Yolande d’Aragon. Appointed Master of Finances and later head of the council, he was eliminated due to his disastrous policies and growing influence on the young sovereign. Following a summary trial, he was sentenced to be executed by drowning in Dun-le-Roi (Cher).
June 12, 1427: Assassination of the “Camus de Beaulieu,” a Favorite of Charles VII
Jean Vernet, an Auvergnat military man known as the “Camus de Beaulieu” and the new favorite of the King of France Charles VII after the death of Pierre de Giac, was assassinated by Jean de Brosse in Poitiers. Quickly appointed Grand Master of the Stables and then Captain of Poitiers, his influence on the young sovereign irritates his stepmother, Yolande d’Aragon, and the head of the government, Constable de Richemont, leading them to get rid of him. The Grand Chamberlain of France, Georges de la Trémoille, takes his place.
May 1428: Joan of Arc Sets Out to Deliver to France
Having heard voices calling her to deliver France from English oppression and place the Dauphin on the throne, a 17-year-old shepherdess, Joan of Arc, presents herself to Robert de Baudricourt, captain of Vaucouleurs. Popular fervor forces him to grant her safe conduct and an escort to Chinon, where she was to meet the future Charles VII. After being allowed to speak to him, who, suspiciously, had her imprisoned for formality, the “maid” was sent to Orleans, besieged by the English.
October 12, 1428: Beginning of the Siege of Orleans by the English
Siege of Orléans, 1429, using cannon fire.
After securing the surrounding area (August and September), English troops led by Thomas Montaigu, Earl of Salisbury, camped in front of Orleans, the last bastion on the Loire, still ruled by the Dauphin. Seeking to surround the well-fortified city by establishing bastions, the English begin a long siege. Defended by the French garrison of Jean de Dunoy, Orleans held out until May 8, 1429, when Joan of Arc liberated it.
February 12, 1429: French Rout in the “Day of the Herrings”
Eager to replenish supplies, several thousand Orleans residents, led by Jean de Dunois, Count of Longueville, decide to leave their besieged city to intercept a convoy of 300 English carts coming from Chartres, which carried a considerable amount of fish among its provisions. In what became the Battle of Rouvray, known as the “Day of the Herrings,” the French were repelled by the defensive tactics—a circle—of the caravan, protected by 1,500 escort soldiers led by John Falstoff.
April 29, 1429: Joan of Arc Enters Orleans
A major event in the second half of the Hundred Years’ War, the siege of Orleans took place from October 1428 to May 1429. As a stronghold protecting access to the south of France, the city was of crucial importance for both sides. Led by Joan of Arc, the French army broke the blockade and entered Orleans on April 29, 1429. Faced with the arrival of enemy reinforcements, the English finally lifted the siege of the city on May 8, 1429.
June 1429: Charles VII’s Army Launches the Campaign of the Loire Valley
After Orleans, Charles VII’s army seizes Jargeau (June 12), defeating the 5,000 English under Guillaume de la Pole, then Meung-sur-Loire (June 14), Beaugency (June 15-16), and Patay, where Joan of Arc defeats Talbot (June 18). This marks the last of the battles of the Loire Valley campaign (1428–1429), which led to the liberation of the region and represents a turning point in the Hundred Years’ War.
July 9, 1429: Capture of Troyes by Charles VII
Before Châlons and Reims, Troyes opened its doors to Charles VII’s army, thanks to Joan of Arc, after a few days of siege. According to legend, the city, which had sworn allegiance to the King of England, initially refused to surrender its keys. It yields at the mere sight of the “maid,” thus opening the way to Reims, where the Dauphin can be crowned.
July 17, 1429: Coronation of Charles VII
After his victory at Orleans, Charles VII reached Reims Cathedral to be crowned on July 17, 1429. With Joan of Arc by his side, he travels to the “City of Kings,” which was under English control. Entangled in the Hundred Years’ War, still referred to as the “Dauphin,” he finally became the King of France. This coronation strengthens his power and legitimacy among the people. He can now fully dedicate himself to the reconquest of his kingdom.
August 15, 1429: “Statu quo” of Montépilloy Between English and French
The English armies, commanded by the Duke of Bedford, and the French forces of Charles VII, under the leadership of Joan of Arc and her companion, Etienne de Vignolles, known as “La Hire,” meet at the Battle of Montépilloy (near Senlis). Neither victory nor defeat occurs, with neither side, under the scorching sun, abandoning its positions. The encounter ultimately concludes in a stalemate, despite the efforts of the French troops to prompt their adversaries to “move.”
May 23, 1430: Joan of Arc Arrested in Compiègne
Following a series of decisive victories, Joan of Arc led her army in the reconquest of the Parisian basin. The English allies, the Burgundians, besieged the city of Compiègne in April 1430. Joan of Arc came to the aid of the inhabitants but was captured on May 23, 1430. In an attempt to discredit the coronation of Charles VII, the English requested her delivery to their Norman domain.
November 21, 1430: Jean de Luxembourg Hands Over Joan of Arc to the English
Through Jean de Luxembourg, the Burgundians handed over Joan of Arc to the English. He had captured her in Compiègne. She was handed over for a sum of 10,000 pounds. The English entrust her to the Church’s justice, asserting that they would reclaim her if she was not accused of heresy.
January 9, 1431: Start of the Trial of Joan of Arc
The trial of Joan of Arc opened in Rouen on January 9, 1431. An ecclesiastical tribunal that England secretly oversaw judged “The Maid of Orleans.” In the face of the Inquisition, she confessed to hearing voices. Several charges were brought against her, including wearing men’s clothing and refusing submission to the militant Church. She was ultimately found guilty of heresy and witchcraft and sentenced to death.
May 30, 1431: Joan of Arc at the Stake
One year after her capture by the Burgundians in Compiègne, Joan of Arc was taken to the place of her execution. On May 30, 1431, after an unfair trial, she was burned alive at the stake. Charles VII asked for a review of her trial after the French army reclaimed the city. It was declared null a quarter of a century later, on July 7, 1456, and Joan of Arc was rehabilitated.
December 16, 1431: Coronation of Henry VI of England as King of France
Under the Treaty of Troyes (1420), Henry VI of England (1421–1471) was crowned King of France at the age of ten in the Notre-Dame Cathedral of Paris by Cardinal Henry Beaufort. However, due to the Salic Law, which stipulates that his mother, Catherine of Valois, could not transmit the Crown to him as she had no rights of succession, he was deposed from his title in 1453, with Charles VII being reinstated on the throne.
January 1432: Establishment of the University of Caen
Eager to win the favor of its inhabitants, Jean de Lancastre (1389–1435), Duke of Bedford, reigning on behalf of Henry VI of England, decided to establish the University of Caen (Lower Normandy). The teaching structures had been damaged by Henry V during the siege of the city in 1417. Initially limited to the faculties of canon law and civil law, the university did not establish its departments of arts, medicine, and theology until 1437. Charles VII officially recognized the university on July 31, 1450.
May 9, 1435: French Victory Over the English at Gerberoy
As the Hundred Years’ War escalated, the French forces of lords Jean Poton de Xaintrailles (c. 1400-1461) and Etienne de Vignolles (known as “La Hire,” 1390-1443) defeated the 3,000 English troops led by John FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel, in the Battle of Gerberoy (Beauvaisis), also known as “d’Arondel,” in Picardy. It was not until 1451 that Normandy actually came under the control of Charles VII.
September 21, 1435: Treaty of Arras
The signing of the Treaty of Arras in 1435 ended the civil war between the Armagnacs and the Burgundians. Philip III of Burgundy and Charles VII signed a lasting peace that foreshadows the end of the Hundred Years’ War.
April 13, 1436: Capture of Paris by Arthur de Richemond
Led by Constable Arthur III de Richemont (1393–1458), the French army entered Paris, liberating the city from English occupation. In November 1438, Charles VII (1403–1461) was able to reinvest his capital, abandoned in 1418, symbolically restoring his authority. Commissioned by the Count of Angiviller on behalf of Louis XVI, a painting by Jean-Simon Berthélemy commemorates the event: “The Recapture of Paris from the English” (1787).
November 12, 1437: Entry of Charles VII into Paris
King Charles VII triumphantly enters Paris after nineteen years of absence. The capital surrenders on its own, having expelled the English troops. The recapture of Paris was the culmination of the campaign to reconquer the kingdom of France, which began with Orléans in 1429. France was almost entirely liberated from English rule. The Truce of Tours (May 20, 1444) complements the king’s successes.
February 2, 1439: Appointment of Jacques Cœur as Grand Financier of France
Merchant and businessman Jacques Coeur (1400–1456) became the grand financier of the kingdom of France. The primary creditor and banker of Charles VII, who became master of the mints in Bourges in 1435, completely reorganized the country’s finances in a disastrous state. He contributed to the war effort by providing the king with the means necessary to fight the English in France.
November 2, 1439: Charles VII Institutes the Payment of “la taille”
To “drive out” the English from France, the king must rebuild an army. Under the name “taille,” the money needed for the war effort will be collected in the form of a tax from each family in the kingdom. The clergy and the nobility were not affected. Delegates from the Estates General authorized Charles VII to levy the taille annually.
February 1440: Start of the “Praguerie”
Refusing the ordinance of November 2 regarding the reform of the army (Estates General of Orléans, following the excesses of the “écorcheurs”), the great lords and vassals of France rose against King Charles VII. Among them were John II, Duke of Alençon, Charles de Bourbon, or Georges de la Trémoille, and the “Praguerie,” named after the revolt of the Hussites in Bohemia, succeeded in gaining the dauphin, Louis XI, to its cause. However, it was repulsed in Poitou and Bourbonnais and ultimately crushed in Auvergne.
July 24, 1440: Signing of the Treaty of Cusset, Ending the “Praguerie”
The Treaty of Cusset (Auvergne) was signed, ending the “Praguerie,” which saw the great vassals of France rise against Charles VII and Arthur de Richemont (since February 1440). To pacify the kingdom, the king “pensions” the rebellious lords and rewards the loyalty of his faithful. His son, Louis XI, the dauphin, who was convinced to join the revolt against his father by promising him his guardianship, was appointed to govern Dauphiné as a golden exile.
April 28, 1442: Birth of Edward IV, King of England
Edward IV, the future king of England (1461–1470 and 1470–1483), was born in Rouen. Son of Richard of York and head of the House of York, he fought in the fratricidal War of the Roses against Henry VI of Lancaster, whom he managed to depose in 1461. He allied with Charles the Bold, the powerful Duke of Burgundy, against Louis XI, but the latter persuaded him to withdraw (Treaty of Picquigny, 1475). Upon his sudden death in Westminster on April 9, 1483, his son, Edward V, succeeded him.
June 8, 1442: Departure of Charles VII’s Army for the Campaign in Guyenne
Leading the Guyenne expedition with nearly 30,000 men, Charles VII reached Toulouse. Uniting the French nobility around him, including the counts of Armagnac, Foix, and Albret, and securing the support of the great vassals of the south, he marches on Tartas, near Dax, which he takes on June 24 from the English. The latter were powerless and short on reinforcements. The campaign continues favorably at Agen, then at Montauban. During the summer, the royal army will liberate the Landes, Aquitaine, and the entire Languedoc.
May 26, 1445: The First Permanent Army in France
King Charles VII created the Companies of Ordnance on May 26, 1445. This new military formation constituted the first permanent army at the disposal of the King of France. Previously, to wage war, the king called upon his vassals according to the feudal custom of the ban. However, vassals were only obligated to serve for 40 days. The king had to recruit mercenaries, who were expensive and often uncontrollable.
March 16, 1448: Start of the Campaign in Normandy
March 16, 1448, marks the beginning of the campaign in Normandy with the surrender of the city of Le Mans. The Duchy of Brittany and the Kingdom of France opposed the Duchy of Normandy and the Kingdom of England. After a year of fighting from 1448 to 1449, the final victory will be Franco-Breton.
April 28, 1448: Creation of the Corps of Francs-Archers
On April 28, 1448, King Charles VII of France promulgated an ordinance for the creation of a corps of francs-archers in the French troops. This ordinance mandates that an archer must accompany each group of more than fifty households. These francs-archers were generally commoners who were then exempted from paying the taille in exchange for their military engagement in the royal army.
March 23, 1449: François de Surienne Seizes the City of Fougères
On March 23, 1449, in the midst of a truce between France and England, François de Surienne, known as “the Aragonese,” captured the Breton city of Fougères. He had spent more than twenty years of his life in the service of the King of England and was known as an exceptional artilleryman who, before the city of Fougères, had already taken more than thirty cities. His actions caused trouble between France and England, then at war.
July 19, 1449: Capture of Verneuil
On July 19, 1449, Pierre de Brézé, on orders from King Charles VII, entered the city of Verneuil to seize it. This episode, at the end of the Hundred Years’ War between France and England, was part of the reconquest of Normandy by the Kingdom of France. In less than a month, the French succeeded in their goals by forcing the English garrison to surrender.
November 10, 1449: Liberation of the City of Rouen
On November 10, 1449, after more than 30 years of English occupation, the city of Rouen was liberated by King Charles VII, who made a solemn entry into the city. This victory of the King of France was part of a larger list of reconquests of French territories abandoned by the English during the Hundred Years’ War. Other victories will gradually allow King Charles VII to bring this war between France and England to an end.
January 1, 1450: Capture of Harfleur
On January 1, 1450, King Charles VII of France retook the city of Harfleur, held by the English since 1415, following a siege. This liberation of the city of Harfleur was part of the successive victories of King Charles VII over the English in the reconquest of Brittany and Normandy, which gradually brought an end to the Hundred Years’ War between France and England.
April 15, 1450: Battle of Formigny
April 15, 1450, was the date of the Battle of Formigny, a battle linked to the Hundred Years’ War between France and England. Led by Charles de Bourbon and Arthur de Richemont, the Franco-Breton troops managed, through force of combat, to defeat the English. Normandy was then completely recovered by France, partially ending the Hundred Years’ War.
June 12, 1451: Signing of the Surrender Treaty of the City of Bordeaux
On June 12, 1451, the city of Bordeaux was the subject of a surrender treaty concluded between the Kingdom of France, represented by the troops of Charles VII, and the Kingdom of England. In the midst of the Hundred Years’ War between the two countries, the city of Bordeaux was handed over to the French, who occupied it on June 29, before the Englishman John Talbot came to retake it in 1452.
October 2, 1452: Birth of the Future King of England, Richard III
On October 2, 1452, in England, the future king of the realm, Richard III, was born. Brother of King Edward IV, Richard III of England reigned over the British kingdom from 1483 to 1485, the year in which he lost his life in the Battle of Bosworth, an event that would end the War of the Roses. The writer Shakespeare will dedicate a play to him a few years later.
October 23, 1452: Englishman John Talbot Retakes the City of Bordeaux
On October 23, 1452, the city of Bordeaux returned to the hands of the English. After being the subject of a surrender treaty a year earlier, the city of Bordeaux, then occupied by the French troops of Charles VII, was retaken by the Englishman John Talbot in 1452. This struggle between the two countries to hold the city of Bordeaux illustrates the Hundred Years’ War that pitted France against England.
July 17, 1453: The Battle of Castillon
The French army of Charles VII achieved a decisive victory over the English in the Girondin village of Castillon. For some, this battle marks the end of the Hundred Years’ War as the English, following the conflict, abandon their pursuit of the French throne. It also definitively puts an end to the English presence in Guyenne. The reconquest of the Aquitaine region will be complete when the King of France seizes Bordeaux on October 19. The English will then be definitively expelled from the kingdom. The Battle of Castillon also witnessed the death of one of the English leaders of the Hundred Years’ War, John Talbot.
June 28, 1461: Coronation of Edward IV of England
On June 28, 1461, Edward IV was proclaimed King of England. The son of Richard of York and Cecily Neville, he will be the first King of England to belong to the House of York. The beginning of his reign will be marked by the Wars of the Roses, which will pit his own dynasty against the House of Lancaster for many years and through numerous battles. He suddenly passed away on April 9, 1483.
July 22, 1461: Death of King Charles VII of France
Charles VII dies in Mehun-sur-Yèvre on July 22, 1461. Nicknamed the “Victorious” or the “Well-Served,” he brought an end to the Hundred Years’ War in 1453. Disinherited by his father in favor of the King of England, Charles VII had to wait for the intervention of Joan of Arc to reclaim his legitimacy. His son, Louis XI, succeeded him.
August 15, 1461: Coronation of Louis XI
Louis XI, son of Charles VII and Marie of Anjou, was crowned King of France in Reims. Nicknamed “The Prudent,” he reigned by defending the peasants and aligning himself with the people, a stance contrary to the strengthening of his royal authority and against the great feudal lords of the Kingdom of France.
August 29, 1475: The Treaty of Picquigny
The Battle of Castillon (1453) in many aspects signifies the end of the Hundred Years’ War, but it was the Treaty of Picquigny signed in 1475 that definitively concluded the conflict. In 1474, the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, always in search of territories, allied with Edward IV of England. In July 1475, English forces landed, but their Burgundian ally was off warring in other lands. Louis XI took advantage of this situation to have the King of England sign a treaty. Edward IV received significant sums from France. In exchange, he must return to England, end the alliance with the Duke of Burgundy, and legitimize the King of France.
References
Mortimer, I. (2008). The Fears of Henry IV: The Life of England’s Self-Made King. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 978-1-84413-529-5.
Lambert, Craig L. (2011). “Edward III’s siege of Calais: A reappraisal”. Journal of Medieval History. 37 (3): 245–256. doi:10.1016/j.jmedhist.2011.05.002. S2CID 159935247.
Neillands, Robin (2001). The Hundred Years War (revised ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-26131-9.
Postan, M. M. “Some Social Consequences of the Hundred Years’ War”, Economic History Review 12#1/2, 1942, pp. 1–12. online
Cuttino, G. P., “The Causes of the Hundred Years War”, Speculum 31#3 (1956), pp. 463–477 online
Ormrod, W. (2001). Edward III. Yale English Monarchs series. London: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-11910-7.
Powicke, Michael (1962). Military Obligation in Medieval England. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-820695-8.
Famous for her role in French history, Joan of Arc (1412-1431) was also known as Jeanne d’Arc, Joan the Maid, or the Maid of Orleans. She was a peasant girl from Domremy, Lorraine, who supposedly received divine guidance telling her to save the king from the English and the Burgundians. She convinced King Charles VII to give her an army in 1429 by traveling to Chinon. She helped end the Siege of Orleans with a group of royal warriors and then took Charles VII to be crowned at Reims.
But the Burgundians seized her and sent her over to the English the next year. On May 30th, 1431, she was put on trial for witchcraft and executed by being burned at the stake in Rouen’s central market. The Catholic Church canonized Joan of Arc as a saint in 1920, after reevaluating the 1456 trial that brought her to prominence. She is a legendary character in French history, inspiring many works of literature and art and serving as the focus of various political comeback campaigns.
Who was Joan of Arc?
Since the 1400s, Joan of Arc’s narrative has been the subject of several interpretations and recoveries, resulting in a vast library that dwarfs that of any other renowned figure from the Middle Ages, including Charlemagne and Saint Louis. After a cursory examination of her classical life, the question of how she would be remembered historically appears more intriguing.
Most historians believe that Joan of Arc was born at Domrémy, a village dependent on Vaucouleurs and so near to the French Empire, on January 6, 1412 (though different dates are also put forth). In 1425, Joan, a member of a family of prosperous farmers, had her first voices. She was told by the saints of Bar, Michael, Catherine, and Margaret, the patron saints of the area, that she must visit the dauphin Charles and aid him in “driving” the English out of France.
In the letters, Joan emphasized her virginity by referring to herself as “Jeanne la Pucelle” (Joan the Maiden) or simply as “la Pucelle” (the Maiden), and she signed her name “Jehanne.” She gained fame in the 1600s as the “Maid of Orleans.”
Though there were many prophets and prophetesses active in the time period, Charles VII welcomed her in March 1429. The Duke of Alençon, who had come to believe in Joan’s divine purpose, had the girl undergo both a medical and a theological examination at the suggestion of his advisors. Without a hitch, Joan breezed through both tests. King Louis listened to his court and consented to dispatch the Pucelle (Joan’s other name) to lift the siege of Orleans, even though he did not seem to have fully fallen into the extremely voluntary messianism of Joan.
Joan predicted that Charles would become king and that Paris would be taken back. In spite of certain French captains’ skepticism about Joan’s unorthodox “tactics,” the siege of Orleans was successfully lifted on May 8, 1429. Later triumphs followed, including the one at Patay (18 June 1429), and Joan ultimately succeeded in convincing her king to invade Burgundy in order to be crowned in the cathedral of Reims. On July 17, 1429, this action was taken.
Joan’s situation got increasingly difficult. Charles VII increasingly distanced himself from her under the influence of Georges de la Trémoille when she failed and was wounded in front of Paris, casting doubt on the veracity of her prophecies. Joan and her family were nobly elevated at year’s end in 1429, but she was soon given menial tasks and eventually sent to Compiègne on May 23 of the following year. She was tricked into a trap on the 23rd and sold to the English. After a highly politicized trial presided over by Pierre Cauchon, Joan of Arc was found guilty of heresy, relapse, and idolatry and executed by burning on May 30, 1431. The French monarch made no serious effort to get her back. To prevent a cult from forming, Joan of Arc’s ashes were dumped into the Seine.
Joan of Arc, between history and legend
By the late 15th century, Joan of Arc had already entered the annals of history as a figure of mythology. National heroine, she served under the Third Republic for the revanchist cause of the “blue line of the Vosges.” Since 1920, when she was canonized, she has been revered as a holy figure. When considering the significance of this narrative in French history, it is hard to overstate how vital it is. The first miracle would be that she was able to overcome the reluctance of Charles VII and arm herself against the English army while she was only seventeen years old (she was born in 1412). Her parents are well-to-do peasants.
Only two trials, Joan’s condemnation trial at Rouen in 1431 and her rehabilitation trial, which Charles VII consented to open in 1456 at the request of Joan’s mother Isabelle Romée, exist to provide historical context for the story. With her defenses up, Joan’s word is skewed, and the accounts of her contemporaries are heavily colored by myth. Historians have the responsibility of calculating Joan’s debt to and contribution to her era.
Despite being disproven nearly a century ago, the theory of “bastardy,” which claims she is the illegitimate daughter of Isabeau of Bavaria and Louis of Orleans, persists with remarkable tenacity among sensationalists. While accusations of witchcraft served the English well, evidence reveals that some people, notably Rouen’s judges, theologians, and jurists, really held such beliefs.
It is heresy to cut ties with the militant Church in favor of hearing God’s message via the intercession of Saint Margaret and Saint Michael. For a layman at the turn of the fifteenth century, to partake in frequent communion was to defy the conciliar commands and thereby break with the church.
Domrémy’s proximity to the Empire’s borders heightened the already present sense of nationality. People struggled to protect the fleurs-de-lis from a pretend duke because they only had one king in their hearts. Ideas that speak to the resilience of Mont-Saint-Michel and the power of the coronation that spread among the people there. Joan of Arc then departed to “reveal” her mission to the king, following in the footsteps of earlier female prophets who had done the same for male monarchs. The difference this time was that Joan became a national icon.
The English recognized her symbolic value
Joan of Arc in the protocol of the parliament of Paris (1429). Drawing by Clément de Fauquembergue.
One of Joan of Arc’s distinguishing features is that she stirred up emotions even while she was alive. Indeed, the English (the Duke of Bedford in the lead) and the Burgundians accused her of being a witch, while Jean Gerson and Christine de Pizan praised her. Thus, she earned the moniker “the whore of the Armagnacs” (because Robert de Baudricourt, commander of her local châtellenie, belonged to the Armagnac faction).
The symbolic value of Joan of Arc was immediately recognized by the English, who purchased her from Jean de Luxembourg for 10,000 livres and moved her to Rouen, the capital of seized France, to be tried by an ecclesiastical court. In the same vein as touching on the validity of its ruler, Charles VII, by having the populace believe in a religious trial while, in reality, it is mostly a political one, is the myth of Joan of Arc. Despite the trial and the subsequent dispersal of the ashes, the tale persists.
Since no corpse was ever found after the events of May 30, 1431, proponents of the theory that Joan was still alive and well swear to her being “not dead” at Rouen on the basis of the appearance of three imposter Jains between 1436 and 1460. The king has mastered the art of capitalizing on the legend of the person who approved his coronation and therefore confirmed his right to the throne. After the Armagnacs and Burgundians had made peace at the Treaty of Arras, he had Joan put on trial for rehabilitation and framed her actions in the context of a war against a foreign power (1435).
The death of Charles VII, however, began Joan of Arc’s steady decline into obscurity, even though she was still praised by François Villon or in the Mystères (a dramatic genre) towards the end of the 15th century. And this is hardly the moment in which to honor a medieval prophetess…
“Idiot” and “pious deceit” for Joan of Arc
True, the Ligueurs did a nice job of rehabilitating Joan of Arc for a while in the 16th century, but the Renaissance and the Enlightenment were not sympathetic to anything remotely “Middle Ages,” and so her reputation suffered.
Both Joachim du Bellay and Girard Haillan saw her as little more than a tool of the court, and the latter even cast doubt on her virginity. Voltaire called her an “unfortunate idiot,” a victim of the monarch and the Church, while Montesquieu found only “pious duplicity” in her, but the most violent were the thinkers of the Enlightenment. It wasn’t until the 19th century that Joan reappeared, this time as a cultural figure rather than with an air of holiness.
The romanticism of the 19th century, which was more receptive to medieval and “Gothic” motifs than the enlightened Enlightenment, helped revive the tale of Joan of Arc.
The most iconic example is perhaps Jules Michelet, who in 1856 wrote in his signature manner, “Let us always remember, Frenchmen, that the fatherland among us was born from the heart of a woman, from her compassion and her tears, from the blood she bled for us.” Joan of Arc personifies the common folk: strong and uncomplicated. One of the most potent tools used to build the national republican novel and the myth was Joan of Arc. No one anticipated that the prophetess would one day be revered as a cultural symbol.
The Holy Joan of Arc
The Church’s reacquiescence in Joan’s case was indirectly encouraged by Jules Quicherat, a Michelet student. And he was an anticlerical historian that he uncovered these primary documents in the 1840s, publishing them for the first time. The historian Quicherat “charged” King Charles VII with abandoning Joan of Arc and called the Church an “accomplice” in his prologue. It was the work of German historian Guido Görres (The Maid of Orleans, 1834) that spurred two Catholic historians to attempt a recovery of Joan.
In 1860, Henri Wallon released his biography of Joan of Arc. For him, Joan is a saint and a martyr; he emphasizes her devotion but acknowledges that she was actually abandoned. Wallon reaches out to Monseigneur Dupanloup in an effort to enlist his support in the cause of canonizing Joan of Arc. During a time of dechristianization and crisis of faith, Bishop of Orleans Félix Dupanloup felt it was crucial for the Church to use powerful symbols. Specifically, in 1869, he wrote a panegyric praising Joan of Arc and formally advocated for her canonization.
In addition to her continuing popularity and republican icon status, the political climate of the second half of the nineteenth century played a significant role in the Catholic recovery of Joan of Arc. The first major shift occurred in 1878, on the occasion of Voltaire’s centennial. Anyone who could call Joan an “idiot” and the Church as a whole would understand why Catholics would dislike this guy. As a protest against the philosopher’s glorification, the Duchess of Chevreuse urged all French ladies to bring flowers to the Place des Pyramides and place them at the feet of the monument of Joan of Arc.
The anti-clerical Republicans, who didn’t want to give up on their party’s symbol, organized a counter-protest. Nothing happened because the prefecture forbade both. This, however, marked the beginning of a serious reappropriation of Joan by conservative Catholics. A nationalist right that wanted its own Joan of Arc emerged in the wake of the Dreyfus Affair (1898) and the subsequent Boulangist crises of the 1880s. Last but not least, the response of the Pope was significant; he reopened her trial in 1894, and Joan of Arc was beatified in 1909 and canonized in 1920. The Catholics, and especially the nationalist right and extreme right, reclaimed Joan of Arc.
The nationalist heroin
Statue of Jeanne d’Arc in Paris, Rue de Rivoli. Image: Daniel Stockman
This Joan was progressively forgotten by the Republic over the 20th century and into the 21st, while being glorified by nationalists and the far right. Nationalism, anti-Parliamentarianism, royalism, and Catholic fundamentalism, all tinged with anti-Semitism, overwhelm Joan of Arc.
After the Dreyfus case, the extreme right adopted Joan as their mythological anti-Jewish character. She had to be the one to preserve not just the military’s traditions but also the established order. To commemorate the 500th anniversary of the liberation of Orléans, a postcard was postmarked with the words “Joan of Arc against the Jews” in 1939. The emblem was clearly also adopted by the Vichy dictatorship.
After the war, both De Gaulle and the Communists hailed Joan, and by the end of the 1940s, she seemed to have returned to the Republican fold. But that influence eventually died down, and it wasn’t until Jean-Marie Le Pen revived Marian cults in 1988 that the Virgin Mary was once again used as a symbol of French nationalism. Despite left-wing protests, Joan of Arc eventually became a footnote in French history, with little to no mention in official textbooks, despite scholars still agreeing on her significance.
During her lifetime, Joan of Arc was mostly regarded as a myth, and she was quickly the subject of political and religious recuperation, neither of which helped historians. Because of this, it is difficult to determine who Joan of Arc really was; yet, it seems to have been established that her part in the events of the Hundred Years’ War was incidental. It wasn’t until later that she became really significant. Although she may not generate the same level of excitement as she once did, the constant stream of hypotheses about her, some of which are more plausible than others, demonstrates that she continues to pique the public’s curiosity.
THE TIMELINE OF JOAN OF ARC
Joan of Arc was born on January 6, 1412
Domremy, France, was the birthplace of the French heroine Joan of Arc, sometimes known as “the virgin.”
Beginning on January 1, 1425, at the age of 13, she started to hear voices
She hears voices for the first time. She claims that God and the archangels Saint Michel, Saint Catherine, and Saint Marguerite are behind these sounds.
In 1429, on April 29, Joan of Arc arrived in Orleans
Joan of Arc, a young lady from Lorraine, led an army into Orleans, claiming to have been sent there by God to declare Charles’s royal legitimacy and to expel the English from France. Since October 1428, the city has been under English siege. On May 8, 1429, Charles VII’s last army conquered the city of Orleans, and on July 17, 1429, Charles VII was crowned at Reims under the direction of Joan of Arc. Afterward, he was prepared to retake the country and restructure royal authority.
The coronation of Charles VII took place on July 17, 1429
Charles VII was crowned in Reims Cathedral with Joan of Arc present.
In Compiègne on May 23, 1430, Joan of Arc was taken into custody
Captured by a mercenary serving the Duke of Burgundy, Jean de Luxembourg, Joan of Arc was then sold to the English for 10,000 livres, despite having played a pivotal role in the liberation of Orleans the previous year. In 1431, she was prosecuted for heresy at the Inquisition Court in Rouen and executed by burning at the stake, even though she was not provided any legal representation. In 1456, she was rehabilitated.
The trial of Joan of Arc started on January 9, 1431
Joan of Arc, accused of heresy, was tried by a court at Rouen presided over by Pierre Cauchon, bishop of Beauvais. On February 21, at the royal chapel of Rouen Castle, the first open session began. On May 24, she publicly repented and admitted her faults, but by May 28, she had reversed her decision. On May 30, at Rouen, on the Place du Vieux-Marché, Joan of Arc was burned to death.
It was on May 30, 1431, when Joan of Arc was publicly executed
Rouen’s Place du Vieux-Marché (Haute-Normandie) is where Joan of Arc was burned to death for her “relapse” (return to heresy). The high stake prevented the executioner from suffocating Joan of Arc before the flames reached her. Two years earlier, in 1429, Joan of Arc had successfully freed Orleans from the English siege and had Charles VII crowned at Reims. But the Burgundians captured her at Compiègne and sold her to the English. The monarch made no overt attempt to save her.
Joan of Arc was canonized as a saint on January 1, 1909
After her death, Joan of Arc was elevated to sainthood.
On May 16, 1920, Benedict XV officially declared Joan of Arc a saint
The Catholic Church officially recognized Joan of Arc as a saint.
Some three hundred representatives of the Third Estate, but also of the aristocracy and the clergy, took the oath of the Jeu de Paume (Tennis Court) on June 20, 1789, swearing not to separate until a new French Constitution was completed. The agreement is purely symbolic in nature and has no legal weight. It was a crucial moment in the establishment of the French Republic. It was on the strength of this oath that a National Constituent Assembly was established. It will create a Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and put an end to special treatment.
When and Why Did the Tennis Court Oath Take Place?
Popular unrest has plagued the French monarchy since its economic and financial crises began in 1788. On May 5th, 1789, King Louis XVI convened the Estates General in an effort to ease tensions. The church, the nobles, and the Third Estate all sent representatives to the Versailles conference. However, both the talks and the expectations of the cahiers de doléances (or simply cahiers) were challenging.
As soon as the Third Estate deputies realized their numbers had doubled, the first thing they asked for was the ability to vote with their heads instead of following orders. On June 17, unauthorized by Louis XVI, they convened as a National Assembly with the help of certain obstinate members of the aristocracy and church. The latter had their meeting room closed to put an end to this affront. The famous oath was taken on June 20, 1789, in the gymnasium of the “Jeu de Paume.”
What Was the Text of the Tennis Court Oath?
Minutes of the taking of the Jeu de Paume oath (Tennis Court Oath) Signature page.
A common quote from the Jeu de Paume oath goes like this: “(The National Assembly) decides that all the members of this assembly will take a solemn oath to never separate and to gather wherever circumstances require, until the Constitution of the kingdom is established and consolidated on solid foundations.” On the very first pages of the newspaper that would come to be considered “the voice of the Republic,” the oath was printed.
Jean-Baptiste-Pierre Bevière penned the passage after being moved by the 1776 Declaration of Independence of the United States.
The text of the Tennis Court Oath (Jeu de Paume oath)
The National Assembly, considering that it is called to fix the Constitution of the Kingdom, to operate the regeneration of public order, and to maintain the true principles of the Monarchy, nothing can prevent it from continuing its deliberations in some place that it is forced to establish itself, and that finally, wherever its members are gathered, there is the National Assembly; decides that all the members of this assembly shall immediately take a solemn oath never to separate and to gather wherever circumstances require until the Constitution of the kingdom is established and consolidated on solid foundations; and that the said oath being taken, all the members, and each one of them in particular, shall confirm by their signature this unshakeable resolution.
What Were the Implications of This Oath?
The parliamentarians fulfilled their word and were joined by members of the aristocracy and the clergy, despite King Louis XVI’s efforts to subvert the Jeu de Paume pledge. The Count of Mirabeau famously said on June 23, 1789, “We are here by the desire of the people and we will only get away by the power of bayonets.” So as not to seem weak, Louis XVI acknowledged the National Assembly on June 27. On July 9, the deputies established the National Constituent Assembly.
Separation of powers, national sovereignty, elimination of privileges, etc., are all essential concepts that will be spelled out in this one, just as they were in the Constitution of 1791. The Enlightenment provided the impetus for the creation of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen .
How Should We Analyze David’s Painting?
The Jeu de Paume Oath, painting by Jacques Louis David
Due to the political unrest of the moment, Jacques-Louis David was unable to complete his painting of the Jeu de Paume Oath, which he had begun sketching in 1791 and 1792. While the players’ clothing is just as drawn, their exquisite physique lends them a heroic air. Like actors in a play, the deputies have been divided up into sections based on a made-up line.
The focus is on Jean Bailly, the president of the Third State, who confronts the king’s representative. In the lower middle, a monk, an abbot, and a Protestant pastor stand together for the greater good of their country. The wind pushing the drapes in the upper left corner of the painting is a metaphor for the energy of the protesters who are blowing on the assembly. It’s like a revolutionary breeze from France (France Revolution).
Relations between the West and the Ottoman Empire were poisoned by political, cultural, and religious conflicts around the end of the 16th century. Multiple confrontations between the two superpowers began as early as 1463, when Turkish expansionism in the Mediterranean triggered tensions. Sultan Selim II of the Ottoman Empire set out to conquer Venice’s dominion of Cyprus in 1570. The raid initiated the fourth conflict between Venice and the Ottoman Empire.
Pope Pius V established the Holy League on May 25, 1571, in an effort to halt the advancing Turks. At the naval battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, the fate of Cyprus was decided.
There, off the Greek coast to the west, Don Juan of Austria led a Christian navy into battle against Selim II’s armada. The Turkish fleet was utterly destroyed by the combined armies of Spain and Venice in a matter of hours. About 7,500 Christians were killed, while at least twice as many Turks perished. Because of the Holy League’s victory at Lepanto, Ottoman expansionism in the Mediterranean was finally halted.
What Were the Causes of the Battle of Lepanto?
The city of Lepanto, on the west coast of Greece, plays a pivotal role in the events leading up to the decisive Battle of Lepanto. Since Constantinople’s fall in 1453, Europe and the Ottoman Empire have been at loggerheads about who should control the Mediterranean. The Republic of Venice and its allies fought several brutal battles against the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Selim II, son of Suleiman the Magnificent, set his sights on Cyprus in 1570 because he aspired to be a conqueror. In a few months, he conquered the island that served as the hub of the Venetian maritime empire and an economic nexus between Europe and the Middle East. Pope Pius V called on the European countries to join him in a crusade to retake the city and put a stop to Ottoman expansionism. To set aside their differences, the Christian forces formed an alliance known as the Holy League.
Who Fought in the Battle of Lepanto?
The Christian Holy League fought against the Turkish fleet of Sultan Selim II in the Battle of Lepanto. The Ottoman Empire, which had been established in the late 13th century with the intention of expanding by conquest, remained one of the world’s leading powers as late as 1571. From the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, it contended with Western interests throughout its expansive frontiers. Nearly 250 galleys and 45 galleots, under the leadership of Admiral Ali Pasha, made up the Turkish fleet during the Battle of Lepanto. There were also about 700 artillery and 13,000 sailors in addition to the 34,000 soldiers. Ali Pasha, Mohammed Sirocco, and Occhiali were the Turkish generals in charge of the army.
In May 1571, the Habsburgs of Spain, the republics of Genoa and Venice, the Papal States, the Duchy of Savoy, and the Hospitallers established an alliance known as the Holy League to fight the Turks. Prince Juan of Austria commanded a force of over 200 ships, 1,800 guns, and around 30,000 mainly Spanish and Venetian troops. The latter was a half-brother of King Philip II of Spain as the illegitimate son of Emperor Charles V. Miguel de Cervantes, the author of “Don Quixote,” also fought on the side of the Christians. The writer loses the use of his left hand in this conflict and becomes known as the “Penguin of Lepanto.” Juan of Austria (Spain), Sebastiano Venier (Venice), Marcantonio Colonna (Vatican City), etc. lead the Holy League.
Who Won the Battle of Lepanto?
The Christian fleet reached the Gulf of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, after having sent spies to find the Turkish navy. Due to the narrow gulf’s confinement and lack of escape routes, the Ottomans were at a disadvantage when this conflict began. The Christian guns scattered the Turkish fleet, which led to a storm on Ali Pasha’s ship.
The admiral’s head was severed and mounted on the top of a mast. The already battered Ottoman sailors’ morale completely plummeted, and only a small number of galleys made it to safety. After just a few hours of fighting, the Holy League achieved a stunning victory over the formerly unbeatable Turkish navy. In addition to the 137 seized ships and 50 sunk, the Christian side lost 7,500 men and suffered 20,000 injuries, while the Turkish side lost the same number of men and had 20,000 injuries, and both sides lost a total of 50 ships.
What Was the Results of the Battle of Lepanto?
Despite a resounding impact in the West, the success of the Holy League at Lepanto did not change the course of the conflict. The Ottoman Empire quickly reconstituted its naval force and kept control of all its conquests in the Mediterranean. However, the loss of many experienced sailors was a severe blow to the Sultan. He had to leave the western Mediterranean to Spain and its Italian allies. The Holy League, despite the victory, did not manage to recover the lost territories. With the death of Pope Pius V on May 1, 1572, the European coalition began to break up.
On March 7, 1573, a peace treaty was finally signed between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Venice. The latter, ruined by the war, ceded Cyprus to the Turks in exchange for the resumption of commercial exchanges. France, which had not taken part in the conflict, remained an ally of the Ottomans due to religious wars paralyzing it. If it made it possible to definitively stop the Turkish expansion in the Mediterranean, the principal consequence of the battle of Lepanto was especially symbolic. The victory of Christianity over Islam thus generated the awakening of a European conscience linked to a common faith.
Many Western painters of the period depicted the battle of Lepanto in their works. Specifically, Veronese, Titian, and Tintoretto are the three best Venetian painters of the late Renaissance. In its top portion, Paola Veronese’s “Allegory of the Battle of Lepanto” has a presentation of Venice to Mary. At the same time, Tintoretto, whose real name was Jacopo Robusti, painted “The Battle of Lepanto.” Tiziano Vecellio, better known as Titian, one of the best portraitists of the period, also finished his “Allegory of the Battle of Lepanto” in 1575. King Philip II of Spain sacrificed his baby son Ferdinand for the sake of triumph and God. There is a widespread Christian belief that praying the Rosary before going to battle with the Turks helped secure a victory in the Battle of Lepanto.
The next year, on October 7th, Pius V established “The Feast of Our Lady of Victory” to celebrate the event. When his successor, Pope Gregory XIII, took office in 1573, he moved the celebration of the Holy Rosary to the first Sunday of each month and changed its name to the Feast of the Holy Rosary.
Bibliography:
Bicheno, Hugh. Crescent and Cross: The Battle of Lepanto 1571, pbk., Phoenix, London, 2004, ISBN 1-84212-753-5
For archaeologists interested in the history of clothes and footwear, a major roadblock is presented by the great fragility of the remains. Even so, there are a few unusual findings, usually in the form of traces or prints or extremely tenuous inferences about their likely existence. But it looks like ancient clothing must be a daily practice of our ancestors, even though we lack the clarity to track their evolution. Let’s interpret the evolution of prehistoric clothing.
They decompose rapidly
Clothing does more than only keep us safe; it also stamps us as individuals in both history and the present. As well as its practical uses, clothing also have social and symbolic purposes. The diachronic history of clothing is essential for the prehistoric anthropologist, since it documents the transition from one style to the next, the acculturation of one group by another at a specific period, and the acceptance or imitation of new clothing conventions.
Despite being ubiquitous in modern society, clothes and footwear technologies are notoriously difficult to unearth in archaeological digs due to their rapid decomposition. This is the beauty and the sorrow of Paleo-Mesolithic archaeology: with very few exceptions, we have only a little evidence of the existence of soft and worked materials derived from animals (fur, skins, leathers, ties) or plants (braided fibers, sewed threads).
Ötzi and his clothes
The so-called iceman Ötzi was discovered with a leather quiver, leather clothes, and fur headgear. However, it was sometimes impossible to establish the origin of the components due to their advanced state of degradation. Since no clothing remnants have been directly passed down to us, we can only highlight a few unusual findings, frequent traces, prints, or extremely indirect conclusions of their likely existence.
Adaptation to the cold
The tropics and the equator are known for their high rates of near-naked inhabitants (Fuegians), yet this extreme lifestyle is not limited to those places. Covering up is primarily an adaptation to the cold that occurred simultaneously with the spread of hominins to the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere.
According to anthropologists, the lack of fur might be the driving factor in the development of clothing. This would have been the beginning of the evolution of complex shapes better fitted to withstand the cold among human communities, which would have occurred in tandem with the development of more specialized tools.
“Paleo-lice” for the evolution of clothing
Lices are a particularly useful hint since they are indirect and unanticipated. The systematic wearing of clothes appears to be originated in the Middle Paleolithic period in North Africa, according to genetic analyses of human body lice and their derivation from head lice.
The genetic analyses of lice in clothes enable us to determine the time period in which humans might have acquired clothes first, which is anywhere from 84,000 to 107,000 years ago (the start of the latest ice age or the Last Glacial Period) or perhaps the preceding ice age cycle (170,000 years ago).
Miniature traces left on fabric
The Ötzi mummy, found by stupefaction in the Ötztal Alps on the Italian-Austrian border in 1991, is one of the most extraordinary findings of prehistory, or more accurately, the Late Neolithic. Incredibly, the fully attired man was only dated between 3300 and 3350 BC.
In Georgia’s Dzudzuana cave, wild flax fibers and bovid hair dating back between 31,000 and 13,000 years were found. And weaving baskets or making clothes out of these fibers would have been possible.
Other forms of indirect evidence, such as prints or imprints of clothes, give detailed information about prehistoric sartorial habits. Although such evidence is difficult to come across, when it does it allows us to see how people’s lives, fashions, and social mores have changed through time.
Thus, there are textile imprints found on the pieces of baked clay at Pavlov and Dolni Vestonice (Czech Republic) between 31,000 and 30,000 years ago. Exciting summaries of this topic have been produced by American anthropologists sometime ago (PDF).
Also, there are impressions of what could be fur clothing in the Wahl Gallery of the Fontanet Cave (in France) from the Magdalenian period and dated to 14,000 years ago.
The earliest prehistoric shoes
The footprints found in the Theopetra Cave.
And what about the first shoes, or possibly the sandals? Children’s shoeprints from 135,000 years ago, when Neanderthals were expanding across Europe, were preserved in Greece’s Theopetra Cave.
Scientists investigated the footprints of a group of Gravettians who visited the Dordogne cave of Cussac about 30,000 years ago and left tracks in the clay floor of the cave. Experiments led them to conclude that the shoes were worn, thus it was concluded that naked feet were not present in the area.
Given the technological sophistication of these cultures and the periglacial environment of the recent Paleolithic, the presence of bare feet would actually look peculiar.
Multiple sites in West America (Oregon, Nevada, California) have yielded a large number of plant-fiber sandals that have been dated to the late Pleistocene/early Holocene. The Paleo-Indian braided sandal, which dates back to between 10,000 and 11,000 years ago (Fort Rock Cave, Elephant Mountain Cave), has been documented by a number of scholars, some of whom have even proposed a typology and geography of the footwear.
Examples like these are few during the Paleolithic eras in Europe. The Areni-1 Cave in Armenia yielded the first direct examples of “archaeological” shoes in Europe, dating back to between 3627 and 3377 BC, similar to the age of Ötzi (5,300 years old) and other indirect imprints.
Areni-1 Cave prehistoric shoe.
Tools for making clothes
Even if the clothing’ fibers deteriorate and disintegrate over time, the equipment used to produce them can still provide useful information. The first clothes were likely made between 120,000 and 90,000 years ago, as shown by an examination of bone tools discovered in Morocco’s Smugglers’ Cave.
To be sure, early modern humans, like their Neanderthal counterparts, understood the manipulation of skins to change them into leather (“proto-tanning”) or their direct usage as fur, as shown by the caves at Pech de l’Azé I, Combe-Capelle, Dordogne (60,000–45,000 years old).
While these early implements are not direct proof that real clothes were being made, they do show that skins were being worked and used in various ways to cover the body and decorate dwellings. The remains of carnivores that were killed and skinned rather than eaten, point in the same general direction.
Yet, there is one of these indirect technical hints—the eyed needle—that definitively shows that clothing was made: A needle and thread can be threaded through the openings, allowing the user to stitch together two pieces of fabric to create a garment or blanket. This tool, whose shape and purpose have not altered since the Paleolithic era (albeit the material, currently steel, was bone back then), was first reported in a limited sense in Europe during the Solutrean period, some 24,000 years before the present.
It has been stated that an even earlier object, from the Denisova cave in the Russian Altai, dates back 45,000 years. However, this figure is still up for question.
The funerary adornment sewed on clothes
On the other hand, the beads that were strung on garments back in the day have survived to this day because they were constructed of durable materials like bone, ivory, and stone. They testify to the use of first sewed and embroidered clothing and bonnets with the remains of the dead in their original location.
One of the most remarkable pieces of evidence of the use of clothing is found in the lavish graves of Sungir (near Wladimir, 118 mi / 190 km east of Moscow, Russia). We can only marvel at the wealth and ingenuity of these burial clothes after seeing the intricate arrangement of thousands of beads found on the bodies of Sungir’s dead, whose dates vary from 34,500 to 32,600 years.
Similarly, the remarkable headgear stitched with hundreds of beads and found in the double grave in Grimaldi (Children’s Grotto), Italy, dates back 14,000 to 15,000 years.
Paleolithic art with clothing, headdresses, necklaces or bracelets
Mal’ta statuettes
Numerous sculptures and engravings show the use of textiles or what can be textiles, such as headdresses or bracelets. Certain female figurines, often referred to as “Venus,” have been successfully dated to the Gravettian era, namely the latter stages of the period’s middle and later periods (31,000 to 26,000 years ago).
This includes the statuettes from Willendorf (Austria) and the Czech or Russian equivalents from Dolni Vestonice, Pavlov, and Kostyonki, as well as Brassempouy and the bas-relief sculptures from Laussel (France). In place of stylish hair, they seem to be wearing some kind of headdress, bonnet, or mesh covering on their heads.
Belts are seen being worn by one of the female Cussac figures (Kostyonki), and necklaces and bracelets are also shown. The Mal’ta and Buret’ statuettes from Siberia, west of Baikal in Russia, date back just 23,000 years; they are fully clothed, suggesting the use of sophisticated clothing if not tattoos or scarification.
Images of similar adornments, often on nude bodies, are likewise well-known to the Magdalenian culture (in the Isturitz cave, in the Basque Country, and in the Laugerie-Basse shelters, in the Dordogne, in particular).
This evidence and findings demonstrate a fundamental truth: clothing production is a prehistoric activity, possibly practiced by several human species, and which has evolved through time. So far, the most impressive Paleolithic artifacts regarding the earlier clothes and shoes are located in Russia and Siberia.
Over time, clothing has evolved to reflect several demographics, temporal, and social characteristics of a given human population, social group, or culture beyond its original, solely defensive role. Especially if we count the embellishments on the garments.
.jpg - Wikimedia Commons){kind=link}