Medieval society accepted war as part of life, Allmand writes as much in the first chapter of his book: "It was part of the divine plan, linked with famine, flood and plague as a manifestation of God's punishment for sins committed." It was part of the natural order and as such armed conflicts were a common enough feature of medieval life. There are few such conflicts however, which enjoy the fame that the Hundred Years War presently does. Today, it is one of the most famous, most notable conflicts in the history of both England and France, being studied intricately by experts and popular among ordinary people as well. So much so in fact, that certain events and themes are now the subject of national legend on both sides of the Channel. For example, the stories of Joan of Arc in France or the pride held for the lethal accuracy and skill of the English longbows. As a consequence of the interest in this period, there have been many accounts and publications on the subject; a small number perhaps might equal the standard of Allmand's.Coming from a background with very little previous knowledge of the conflict, I found Allmand's text easy to read and very informative. In the first two chapters Allmand describes in detail the course and possible causes of the war. Summarising everything from the breakdown of the historic feudal order in England and France, through the successful English campaigns culminating in the victories at Crécy (1346), Poitiers (1356) and Agincourt (1415) to the recovery and eventual success of the French. Allmand's account on the conflict itself, while comparatively short, was only surpassed by the surprising amount of depth and concise detail that meant that a potentially complicated description was grasped with relative ease.
The following chapters deal with many themes including justification for the conflict, concepts of chivalry and other contemporary views regarding the war. Allmand also addresses the military objectives of the English, military and naval organization, recruitment, and the raising of taxes. These chapters are similar in style to the account of the conflict itself. Writing concisely, Allmand gets the main points across easily, setting out the specifics and details of the period and at the same time raising a number of questions which he develops later in the book. These focus around the idea that the war was a major agent of change; because the war was on such a scale, its effects were not limited to the battle-field and the nation as a whole became increasingly involved. For example, when discussing taxation and the raising of funds, Allmand writes: "It would be a mistake to think that the war was directed and paid for by Paris or Westminster alone... local autonomy, energy, and initiatives were all exercised for the best purpose, the defence of the common good itself." It is this theme of a 'national effort' and a 'common good' that Allmand takes up in the second half of the book.
Allmand notes the marked increase in public participation of the war. This can be seen in many areas, but a good example is contemporary literature. The number of contemporary writings, which discussed the subject of the war, show that there was certainly a growing interest in it. Obviously there were many different types of literature, and it is worth noting that some were very anti in their stance to the conflict, but the fact that they were being written show that the war was the subject for much discussion. In France especially feelings of great intensity were being provoked and many took a 'nationalist' stance. This, Allmand writes, was an engineered response on behalf of the authorities who "needed a conscious and continuous interest in the affairs of war among the different elements of the population." It is suggested that the war needed some form of continuous justification so that it would continue to be supported; Allmand identifies this as an early form of propaganda.
This came in many forms, but all of them had one aim in mind "to encourage and secure the widest possible involvement of a nation in war." Such propaganda included accounts of victories being circulated (in many parish churches there was a 'notice board' which displayed such material) and the use of the church who prayed for their nations armies. There were even celebrations, like those seen in the capital when the Black Prince returned from his victory at Poitiers with the King of France as his prisoner. Many more examples could be listed in which the two countries experienced an awakening of their national pride, to the extent that Allmand writes: "it was the long war with England which was the most influential single factor to contribute to the growing awareness of French nationhood in this age." It is certainly true that this awakening of national pride affected France far more than it did in England, it was after all a country with internal factions and foreign soldiers on it soil. This scale of involvement would affect any town or out-laying settlement that was unlucky enough to be either the target of a pro-longed raid (chevauchées) or just caught in the crossfire. Therefore the average French peasant would be far more aware of the war than any English one.
This rise in national identity is a subject that Allmand explores in much depth, indeed, it has not been given justice in this review but in an effort to sum up, Allmand writes that the war was an agent of great change. As well as revolutions on the battlefield and in the organised mechanics of fighting a war, Allmand paid particular attention to the awakening of a national identity. This idea is something that I personally found very interesting and informative, the extent to which it is true is obviously debatable, but I found myself unable to raise any serious objections.
Allmand's book is worthy of high praise. By combining a detailed account of the war with sections on the wider implications of the conflict, he produced a detailed and enjoyable text on the subject. The broad focus that Allmand uses is commendable, and his arguments so convincing and persuasive that I found it very hard to criticise them.
