document_title: Coordinated Universal Time

question_text: what is the time difference between utc and gmt

text: Coordinated Universal Time

text: Etymology

text: The official abbreviation for Coordinated Universal Time is UTC. This abbreviation arose from a desire by the International Telecommunication Union and the International Astronomical Union to use the same abbreviation in all languages. English speakers originally proposed CUT (for "coordinated universal time"), while French speakers proposed TUC (for "temps universel coordonné"). The compromise that emerged was UTC,[8] which conforms to the pattern for the abbreviations of the variants of Universal Time (UT0, UT1, UT2, UT1R, etc.).[9]

text: Uses

text: Time zones around the world are expressed using positive or negative offsets from UTC, as in the list of time zones by UTC offset.

text: The westernmost time zone uses UTC−12, being twelve hours behind UTC; the easternmost time zone, theoretically, uses UTC+12, being twelve hours ahead of UTC. In 1995, the island nation of Kiribati moved those of its atolls in the Line Islands from UTC-10 to UTC+14 so that Kiribati would all be on the same day.

text: UTC is used in many internet and World Wide Web standards. The Network Time Protocol, designed to synchronise the clocks of computers over the internet, encodes times using the UTC system.[10] Computer servers, online services and other entities that rely on having a universally accepted time use UTC as it is more specific than GMT. If only limited precision is needed, clients can obtain the current UTC from a number of official internet UTC servers. For sub-microsecond precision, clients can obtain the time from satellite signals.

text: UTC is also the time standard used in aviation,[11] e.g., for flight plans and air traffic control clearances. Weather forecasts and maps all use UTC to avoid confusion about time zones and daylight saving time. The International Space Station also uses UTC as a time standard.

text: Amateur radio operators often schedule their radio contacts in UTC, because transmissions on some frequencies can be picked up by many time zones.[12]

text: UTC is also used in digital tachographs used on large goods vehicles (LGV) under EU and AETR rules.

text: Mechanism

text: UTC divides time into days, hours, minutes and seconds. Days are conventionally identified using the Gregorian calendar, but Julian day numbers can also be used. Each day contains 24 hours and each hour contains 60 minutes. The number of seconds in a minute is usually 60, but with an occasional leap second, it may be 61 or 59 instead.[13] Thus, in the UTC time scale, the second and all smaller time units (millisecond, microsecond, etc.) are of constant duration, but the minute and all larger time units (hour, day, week, etc.) are of variable duration. Decisions to introduce a leap second are announced at least six months in advance in "Bulletin C" produced by the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service.[14][15] The leap seconds cannot be predicted far in advance due to the unpredictable rate of rotation of the Earth.[16]

text: Nearly all UTC days contain exactly 86,400 SI seconds with exactly 60 seconds in each minute. However, because the mean solar day is slightly longer than 86,400 SI seconds, occasionally the last minute of a UTC day is adjusted to have 61 seconds. The extra second is called a leap second. It accounts for the grand total of the extra length (about 2 milliseconds each) of all the mean solar days since the previous leap second. The last minute of a UTC day is permitted to contain 59 seconds to cover the remote possibility of the Earth rotating faster, but that has not yet been necessary. The irregular day lengths mean that fractional Julian days do not work properly with UTC.

text: Since 1972, UTC is calculated by subtracting the accumulated leap seconds from International Atomic Time (TAI), which is a coordinate time scale tracking notional proper time on the rotating surface of the Earth (the geoid). In order to maintain a close approximation to UT1 (equivalent to GMT), UTC occasionally has discontinuities where it changes from one linear function of TAI to another. These discontinuities take the form of leap seconds implemented by a UTC day of irregular length. Discontinuities in UTC have occurred only at the end of June or December, although there is provision for them to happen at the end of March and September as well as a second preference.[17][18] The International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS) tracks and publishes the difference between UTC and Universal Time, DUT1 = UT1 − UTC, and introduces discontinuities into UTC to keep DUT1 in the interval (−0.9 s, +0.9 s).

text: As with TAI, UTC is only known with the highest precision in retrospect. Users who require an approximation in real time must obtain it from a time laboratory, which disseminates an approximation using techniques such as GPS or radio time signals. Such approximations are designated UTC(k), where k is an abbreviation for the time laboratory.[19] The time of events may be provisionally recorded against one of these approximations; later corrections may be applied using the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) monthly publication of tables of differences between canonical TAI/UTC and TAI(k)/UTC(k) as estimated in real time by participating laboratories.[20] (See the article on International Atomic Time for details.)

text: Because of time dilation, a standard clock not on the geoid, or in rapid motion, will not maintain synchronicity with UTC. Therefore, telemetry from clocks with a known relation to the geoid is used to provide UTC when required, on locations such as those of spacecraft.

text: It is not possible to compute the exact time interval elapsed between two UTC timestamps without consulting a table that describes how many leap seconds occurred during that interval. By extension, it is not possible to compute the duration of a time interval that ends in the future and may encompass an unknown number of leap seconds (for example, the number of TAI seconds between "now" and 2099-12-31 23:59:59). Therefore, many scientific applications that require precise measurement of long (multi-year) intervals use TAI instead. TAI is also commonly used by systems that cannot handle leap seconds. GPS time always remains exactly 19 seconds behind TAI (neither system is affected by the leap seconds introduced in UTC).

text: For most common and legal-trade purposes, the fractional second difference between UTC and UT (GMT) is inconsequentially small. Greenwich Mean Time is the legal standard in Britain during the winter, and this notation is familiar to and used by the population.[21]

text: Time zones

text: Time zones are usually defined as differing from UTC by an integer number of hours,[22] although the laws of each jurisdiction would have to be consulted if sub-second accuracy was required. Several jurisdictions have established time zones that differ by an integer number of half-hours or quarter-hours from UT1 or UTC.

text: Current civil time in a particular time zone can be determined by adding or subtracting the number of hours and minutes specified by the UTC offset, which ranges from UTC−12:00 in the west to UTC+14:00 in the east (see List of UTC time offsets).

text: The time zone using UTC is sometimes denoted UTC±00:00 or by the letter Z—a reference to the equivalent nautical time zone (GMT), which has been denoted by a Z since about 1950. Time zones were identified by successive letters of the alphabet and the Greenwich time zone was marked by a Z as it was the point of origin. The letter also refers to the "zone description" of zero hours, which has been used since 1920 (see time zone history). Since the NATO phonetic alphabet word for Z is "Zulu", UTC is sometimes known as "Zulu time". This is especially true in aviation, where "Zulu" is the universal standard.[23] This ensures all pilots regardless of location are using the same 24-hour clock, thus avoiding confusion when flying between time zones.[24] See the list of military time zones for letters used in addition to Z in qualifying time zones other than Greenwich.

text: On electronic devices that only allow the current time zone to be configured using maps or city names, UTC can be selected indirectly by selecting Reykjavík, Iceland, which is always on UTC and does not use daylight saving time.[25]

text: Daylight saving time

text: UTC does not change with a change of seasons, but local time or civil time may change if a time zone jurisdiction observes daylight saving time (summer time). For example, local time on the east coast of the United States is five hours behind UTC during winter, but four hours behind while daylight saving is observed there.[26]

text: History

text: At the 1884 International Meridian Conference held in Washington, D.C., the local mean solar time at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich in England was chosen to define the Universal day, counted from 0 hours at mean midnight. This agreed with civil Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), used on the island of Great Britain since 1847. In contrast, astronomical GMT began at mean noon, 12 hours after mean midnight of the same date until 1 January 1925, whereas nautical GMT began at mean noon, 12 hours before mean midnight of the same date, at least until 1805 in the Royal Navy, but persisted much later elsewhere because it was mentioned at the 1884 conference. In 1884, the Greenwich Meridian was used for two-thirds of all charts and maps as their Prime Meridian.[27] In 1928, the term Universal Time (UT) was introduced by the International Astronomical Union to refer to GMT, with the day starting at midnight.[28] Until the 1950s, broadcast time signals were based on UT, and hence on the rotation of the Earth.

text: In 1955, the caesium atomic clock was invented. This provided a form of timekeeping that was both more stable and more convenient than astronomical observations. In 1956, the U.S. National Bureau of Standards and U.S. Naval Observatory started to develop atomic frequency time scales; by 1959, these time scales were used in generating the WWV time signals, named for the shortwave radio station that broadcasts them. In 1960, the U.S. Naval Observatory, the Royal Greenwich Observatory, and the UK National Physical Laboratory coordinated their radio broadcasts so time steps and frequency changes were coordinated, and the resulting time scale was informally referred to as "Coordinated Universal Time".[29]

text: In a controversial decision, the frequency of the signals was initially set to match the rate of UT, but then kept at the same frequency by the use of atomic clocks and deliberately allowed to drift away from UT. When the divergence grew significantly, the signal was phase shifted (stepped) by 20 ms to bring it back into agreement with UT. Twenty-nine such steps were used before 1960.[30]

text: In 1958, data was published linking the frequency for the caesium transition, newly established, with the ephemeris second. The ephemeris second is the duration of time that, when used as the independent variable in the laws of motion that govern the movement of the planets and moons in the solar system, cause the laws of motion to accurately predict the observed positions of solar system bodies. Within the limits of observing accuracy, ephemeris seconds are of constant length, as are atomic seconds. This publication allowed a value to be chosen for the length of the atomic second that would work properly with the celestial laws of motion.[31]

text: In 1961, the Bureau International de l'Heure began coordinating the UTC process internationally (but the name Coordinated Universal Time was not formally adopted by the International Astronomical Union until 1967).[32][33] Time steps occurred every few months thereafter, and frequency changes at the end of each year. The jumps increased in size to 100 ms. This UTC was intended to permit a very close approximation to UT2.[29]

text: In 1967, the SI second was redefined in terms of the frequency supplied by a caesium atomic clock. The length of second so defined was practically equal to the second of ephemeris time.[34] This was the frequency that had been provisionally used in TAI since 1958. It was soon recognised that having two types of second with different lengths, namely the UTC second and the SI second used in TAI, was a bad idea. It was thought that it would be better for time signals to maintain a consistent frequency, and that that frequency should match the SI second. Thus it would be necessary to rely on time steps alone to maintain the approximation of UT. This was tried experimentally in a service known as "Stepped Atomic Time" (SAT), which ticked at the same rate as TAI and used jumps of 200 ms to stay synchronised with UT2.[35]

text: There was also dissatisfaction with the frequent jumps in UTC (and SAT). In 1968, Louis Essen, the inventor of the caesium atomic clock, and G. M. R. Winkler both independently proposed that steps should be of 1 s only.[36] This system was eventually approved, along with the idea of maintaining the UTC second equal to the TAI second. At the end of 1971, there was a final irregular jump of exactly 0.107758 TAI seconds, so that 1 January 1972 00:00:00 UTC was 1 January 1972 00:00:10 TAI exactly, making the difference between UTC and TAI an integer number of seconds. At the same time, the tick rate of UTC was changed to exactly match TAI. UTC also started to track UT1 rather than UT2. Some time signals started to broadcast the DUT1 correction (UT1 − UTC) for applications requiring a closer approximation of UT1 than UTC now provided.[37][38]

text: Current number of leap seconds

text: The first leap second occurred on 30 June 1972. Since then, leap seconds have occurred on average about once every 19 months, always on 30 June or 31 December. As of January 2017, there have been 27 leap seconds in total, all positive, putting UTC 37 seconds behind TAI.[39]

text: Rationale

text: Earth's rotational speed is very slowly decreasing because of tidal deceleration; this increases the length of the mean solar day. The length of the SI second was calibrated on the basis of the second of ephemeris time[31][34] and can now be seen to have a relationship with the mean solar day observed between 1750 and 1892, analysed by Simon Newcomb. As a result, the SI second is close to 1/86400 of a mean solar day in the mid‑19th century.[40] In earlier centuries, the mean solar day was shorter than 86,400 SI seconds, and in more recent centuries it is longer than 86,400 seconds. Near the end of the 20th century, the length of the mean solar day (also known simply as "length of day" or "LOD") was approximately 86,400.0013 s.[41] For this reason, UT is now "slower" than TAI by the difference (or "excess" LOD) of 1.3 ms/day.

text: The excess of the LOD over the nominal 86,400 s accumulates over time, causing the UTC day, initially synchronised with the mean sun, to become desynchronised and run ahead of it. Near the end of the 20th century, with the LOD at 1.3 ms above the nominal value, UTC ran faster than UT by 1.3 ms per day, getting a second ahead roughly every 800 days. Thus, leap seconds were inserted at approximately this interval, retarding UTC to keep it synchronised in the long term.[42] The actual rotational period varies on unpredictable factors such as tectonic motion and has to be observed, rather than computed.

text: Just as adding a leap day every four years does not mean the year is getting longer by one day every four years, the insertion of a leap second every 800 days does not indicate that the mean solar day is getting longer by a second every 800 days. It will take about 50,000 years for a mean solar day to lengthen by one second (at a rate of 2 ms/cy, where cy means century). This rate fluctuates within the range of 1.7–2.3 ms/cy. While the rate due to tidal friction alone is about 2.3 ms/cy, the uplift of Canada and Scandinavia by several metres since the last Ice Age has temporarily reduced this to 1.7 ms/cy over the last 2,700 years.[43] The correct reason for leap seconds, then, is not the current difference between actual and nominal LOD, but rather the accumulation of this difference over a period of time: Near the end of the 20th century, this difference was about 1/800 of a second per day; therefore, after about 800 days, it accumulated to 1 second (and a leap second was then added).

text: In the graph of DUT1 above, the excess of LOD above the nominal 86,400 s corresponds to the downward slope of the graph between vertical segments. (The slope became shallower in the 2000s (decade), because of a slight acceleration of Earth's crust temporarily shortening the day.) Vertical position on the graph corresponds to the accumulation of this difference over time, and the vertical segments correspond to leap seconds introduced to match this accumulated difference. Leap seconds are timed to keep DUT1 within the vertical range depicted by this graph. The frequency of leap seconds therefore corresponds to the slope of the diagonal graph segments, and thus to the excess LOD.

text: Future

text: As the Earth's rotation continues to slow, positive leap seconds will be required more frequently. The long-term rate of change of LOD is approximately +1.7 ms per century. At the end of the 21st century, LOD will be roughly 86,400.004 s, requiring leap seconds every 250 days. Over several centuries, the frequency of leap seconds will become problematic.

text: Some time in the 22nd century, two leap seconds will be required every year. The current use of only the leap second opportunities in June and December will be insufficient, and the March and September options will have to be used. In the 25th century, four leap seconds will be required every year, so the current quarterly options will be insufficient. Thereafter there will need to be the possibility of leap seconds at the end of any month. In about two thousand years, even that will be insufficient, and there will have to be leap seconds that are not at the end of a month.[44] In a few tens of thousands of years (the timing is uncertain), LOD will exceed 86,401 s, causing UTC to require more than one leap second per day.

text: In April 2001, Rob Seaman of the National Optical Astronomy Observatory proposed that leap seconds be allowed to be added monthly rather than twice yearly.[45]

text: There is a proposal to redefine UTC and abolish leap seconds, such that sundials would slowly get further out of sync with civil time.[46] The resulting gradual shift of the sun's movements relative to civil time is analogous to the shift of seasons relative to the yearly calendar that results from the calendar year not precisely matching the tropical year length. This would be a major practical change in civil timekeeping, but would take effect slowly over several centuries. UTC (and TAI) would be more and more ahead of UT; it would coincide with local mean time along a meridian drifting slowly eastward (reaching Paris and beyond).[47] Thus, the time system would lose its fixed connection to the geographic coordinates based on the IERS meridian. The difference between UTC and UT could reach 0.5 hour after the year 2600 and 6.5 hours around 4600.[44]

text: ITU‑R Study Group 7 and Working Party 7A were unable to reach consensus on whether to advance the proposal to the 2012 Radiocommunications Assembly; the chairman of Study Group 7 elected to advance the question to the 2012 Radiocommunications Assembly (20 January 2012),[48] but consideration of the proposal was postponed by the ITU until the World Radio Conference in 2015, convening on 2 November.[49]

text: The possibility of suppressing the leap second was considered in November 2015 at the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-15), which is the international regulatory body which defines Coordinated Universal Time.[50] No decision to suppress leap seconds was reached; the issue will be studied further and reconsidered in 2023.[51]


document_title: United States at the FIFA World Cup

question_text: when is the last time the usa missed the world cup

root

text: United States at the FIFA World Cup

text: Record at the FIFA World Cup[edit]

text:
World Cup record

Year
Result
Position
Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA

 1930
Semi-finals
3rd[3]
3
2
0
1
7
6

 1934
Round 1
16th
1
0
0
1
1
7

 1938
Withdrew

 1950
Group stage
10th
3
1
0
2
4
8

 1954
Did not qualify

 1958

 1962

 1966

 1970

 1974

 1978

 1982

 1986

 1990
Group stage
23rd
3
0
0
3
2
8

 1994
Round of 16
14th
4
1
1
2
3
4

 1998
Group stage
32nd
3
0
0
3
1
5

  2002
Quarter-finals
8th
5
2
1
2
7
7

 2006
Group stage
25th
3
0
1
2
2
6

 2010
Round of 16
12th
4
1
2
1
5
5

 2014
Round of 16
15th
4
1
1
2
5
6

 2018
Did not qualify

Total
10/20
0 Titles
33
8
6
19
37
62

tag: table

text:
World Cup match results

Year
Location
Opponent
Result
Score

1930
 Uruguay
 Belgium
W
3–0

 Paraguay
W
3–0

 Argentina
L
6–1

1934
 Italy
 Italy
L
7–1

1938
 France
Did not participate
N/A
N/A

1950
 Brazil
 Spain
L
3–1

 England
W
1–0

 Chile
L
5–2

1954
  Switzerland
Did not qualify
N/A
N/A

1958
 Sweden

1962
 Chile

1966
 England

1970
 Mexico

1974
 Germany

1978
 Argentina

1982
 Spain

1986
 Mexico

1990
 Italy
 Czechoslovakia
L
5–1

 Italy
L
1–0

 Austria
L
2–1

1994
 United States
  Switzerland
D
1–1

 Colombia
W
2–1

 Romania
L
1–0

 Brazil
L
1–0

1998
 France
 Germany
L
2–0

 Iran
L
2–1

 Yugoslavia
L
1–0

2002
 South Korea /  Japan
 Portugal
W
3–2

 South Korea
D
1–1

 Poland
L
3–1

 Mexico
W
2–0

 Germany
L
1–0

2006
 Germany
 Czech Republic
L
3–0

 Italy
D
1–1

 Ghana
L
2–1

2010
 South Africa
 England
D
1–1

 Slovenia
D
2–2

 Algeria
W
1–0

 Ghana
L
2–1 (a.e.t.)

2014
 Brazil
 Ghana
W
2–1

 Portugal
D
2–2

 Germany
L
1–0

 Belgium
L
2–1 (a.e.t.)

2018
 Russia
Did not qualify
N/A
N/A

text: Goalscorers[edit]

text:
Player
Goals
1930
1934
1950
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014

Donovan, LandonLandon Donovan
5

2

3

Patenaude, BertBert Patenaude
4
4

Dempsey, ClintClint Dempsey
4

1
1
2

McBride, BrianBrian McBride
3

1
2

Bradley, MichaelMichael Bradley
1

1

Brown, JimJim Brown
1
1

Caligiuri, PaulPaul Caligiuri
1

1

Donelli, AldoAldo Donelli
1

1

Florie, TomTom Florie
1
1

Gaetjens, JoeJoe Gaetjens
1

1

Green, JulianJulian Green
1

1

Maca, JoeJoe Maca
1

1

Mathis, ClintClint Mathis
1

1

McGhee, BartBart McGhee
1
1

Murray, BruceBruce Murray
1

1

O'Brien, JohnJohn O'Brien
1

1

Pariani, GinoGino Pariani
1

1

Stewart, EarnieEarnie Stewart
1

1

Wallace, FrankFrank Wallace
1

1

Wynalda, EricEric Wynalda
1

1

Brooks, JohnJohn Brooks
1

1

Jones, JermaineJermaine Jones
1

1

~ !Own goals
3

1

1
1

Total
37
7
1
4
2
3
1
7
2
5
5

text: Jeff Agoos (scored for Portugal in 2002)

tag: ul

text: Individual tournament results[edit]

text: Uruguay 1930[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1930 FIFA World Cup Third Place

MF Auld
FW Bookie
MF Brown
GK Douglas
FW Florie (c)
DF Gallagher
DF Gentle
MF Gonsalves
FW McGhee
DF Moorhouse
MF Oliver
FW Patenaude
MF Slone
DF Tracey
DF Vaughn
DF Wood
Coach: Millar

text: Group 4 final standings[edit]

text:
Team
Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts

 United States
2
2
0
0
6
0
+6
4

 Paraguay
2
1
0
1
1
3
−2
2

 Belgium
2
0
0
2
0
4
−4
0

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (UYT)

tag: p

text: United States  v  Belgium

text:
July 13, 1930
3:00 p.m.
Group 4

text:
United States
3–0
 Belgium

Report

text:
Estadio Parque Central, Montevideo
Attendance: 18,346
Referee: José Macías (Argentina)

text: United States  v  Paraguay

text:
July 17, 1930
2:45 p.m.
Group 4

text:
United States
3–0
 Paraguay

Report

text:
Estadio Parque Central, Montevideo
Attendance: 18,306
Referee: José Macías (Argentina)

text: Argentina  v  United States

text:
July 26, 1930
2:45 p.m.
Semifinal

text:
Argentina
6–1
 United States

Report

text:
Estadio Centenario, Montevideo
Attendance: 72,886
Referee: John Langenus (Belgium)

text: Italy 1934[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1934 FIFA World Cup

MF Amrhein
DF Czerkiewicz
FW Dick
FW Donelli
MF Fiedler
MF Florie
MF Gallagher
MF Gonsalves
DF Harker
GK Hjulian
MF Lehman
MF Lynch
DF Martinelli
FW McLean
DF Moorhouse
FW Nilsen
MF Pietras
DF Rapp
FW Ryan
Coach: Gould

text: Game[edit]

text: Italy  v  United States

text:
May 27, 1934
4:30 p.m. (CEST)
Round of 16

text:
Italy
7–1
 United States

Report

text:
Stadio Nazionale PNF, Rome
Attendance: 25,000
Referee: Rene Mercet (Switzerland)

text: Brazil 1950[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1950 FIFA World Cup

GK Borghi
GK Gard
DF Annis
DF Coombes
DF Keough
DF Maca
MF Bahr
MF Colombo
MF McIlvenny
FW Craddock
FW DiOrio
FW Gaetjens
FW Pariani
FW E. Souza
FW J. Souza
FW Wallace
FW Wolanin
Coach: Jeffrey

text: Group 2 final standings[edit]

text:
Team
Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
Pts

 Spain
3
3
0
0
6
1
6

 England
3
1
0
2
2
2
2

 Chile
3
1
0
2
5
6
2

 United States
3
1
0
2
4
8
2

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local BRT (UTC-03)

text: Spain  v  United States

text:
June 25, 1950
3:00 p.m.

text:
Spain
3–1
 United States

Report

text:
Estádio Durival de Britto, Curitiba
Attendance: 9,511
Referee: Mario Vianna (Brazil)

text: United States  v  England

text:
June 29, 1950
3:00 p.m.

text:
United States
1–0
 England

Report

text:
Estádio Independência, Belo Horizonte
Attendance: 10,151
Referee: Generoso Dattilo (Italy)

text: Chile  v  United States

text:
July 2, 1950
3:00 p.m.

text:
Chile
5–2
 United States

Report

text:
Estádio Ilha do Retiro, Recife
Attendance: 8,501
Referee: Mario Gardelli (Brazil)

text: Italy 1990[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1990 FIFA World Cup

1 Meola
2 Trittschuh
3 Doyle
4 Banks
5 Windischmann (c)
6 Harkes
7 Ramos
8 Bliss
9 Sullivan
10 Vermes
11 Wynalda
12 Krumpe
13 Eichmann
14 Stollmeyer
15 Armstrong
16 Murray
17 Balboa
18 Keller
19 Henderson
20 Caligiuri
21 Covone
22 Vanole
Coach: Gansler

text: Group A final standings[edit]

text:
Team
Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts

 Italy
3
3
0
0
4
0
+4
6

 Czechoslovakia
3
2
0
1
6
3
+3
4

 Austria
3
1
0
2
2
3
−1
2

 United States
3
0
0
3
2
8
−6
0

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (CEST/UTC+2)

text: United States  v  Czechoslovakia

text:
June 10, 1990
5:00 p.m.
Group A

text:
United States
1–5
 Czechoslovakia

Report

text:
Stadio Comunale, Florence
Attendance: 33,266
Referee: Kurt Röthlisberger (Switzerland)

text: Italy  v  United States

text:
June 14, 1990
9:00 p.m.
Group A

text:
Italy
1–0
 United States

Report

text:
Stadio Olimpico, Rome
Attendance: 73,423
Referee: Edgardo Codesal (Mexico)

text: Austria  v  United States

text:
June 19, 1990
9:00 p.m.
Group A

text:
Austria
2–1
 United States

Report

text:
Stadio Comunale, Florence
Attendance: 34,857
Referee: Jamal Al Sharif (Syria)

text: United States 1994[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1994 FIFA World Cup

1 Meola (c)
2 Lapper
3 Burns
4 Kooiman
5 Dooley
6 Harkes
7 Pérez
8 Stewart
9 Ramos
10 Wegerle
11 Wynalda
12 Sommer
13 Jones
14 Klopas
15 Moore
16 Sorber
17 Balboa
18 Friedel
19 Reyna
20 Caligiuri
21 Clavijo
22 Lalas
Coach: Milutinović

text: Group A final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 Romania
3
2
0
1
5
5
0
6
Advance to knockout stage

2
  Switzerland
3
1
1
1
5
4
+1
4

3
 United States (H)
3
1
1
1
3
3
0
4

4
 Colombia
3
1
0
2
4
5
−1
3

text: Ranking of third-placed teams[edit]

text:
Pos
Grp
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
D
 Argentina
3
2
0
1
6
3
+3
6
Advance to knockout stage

2
F
 Belgium
3
2
0
1
2
1
+1
6

3
A
 United States
3
1
1
1
3
3
0
4

4
E
 Italy
3
1
1
1
2
2
0
4

5
B
 Russia
3
1
0
2
7
6
+1
3

6
C
 South Korea
3
0
2
1
4
5
−1
2

text: Games[edit]

text: United States  v   Switzerland

text:
June 18, 1994
11:30 a.m. EDT
Group A

text:
United States
1–1
  Switzerland

Report

text:
Pontiac Silverdome, Pontiac
Attendance: 73,425
Referee: Francisco Oscar Lamolina (Argentina)

text: United States  v  Colombia

text:
June 22, 1994
7:30 p.m. PDT
Group A

text:
United States
2–1
 Colombia

Report

text:
Rose Bowl, Pasadena
Attendance: 93,869
Referee: Fabio Baldas (Italy)

text: United States  v  Romania

text:
June 26, 1994
4:00 p.m. PDT
Group A

text:
United States
0–1
 Romania

Report

text:
Rose Bowl, Pasadena
Attendance: 93,869
Referee: Mario van der Ende (Netherlands)

text: Brazil  v  United States

text:
July 4, 1994
12:30 p.m. PDT
Round of 16

text:
Brazil
1–0
 United States

Report

text:
Stanford Stadium, Stanford
Attendance: 84,147
Referee: Joël Quiniou (France)

text: France 1998[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 1998 FIFA World Cup

1 Friedel
2 Hejduk
3 Pope
4 Burns
5 Dooley (c)
6 Regis
7 Wegerle
8 Stewart
9 Moore
10 Ramos
11 Wynalda
12 Agoos
13 Jones
14 Preki
15 Deering
16 Sommer
17 Balboa
18 Keller
19 Maisonneuve
20 McBride
21 Reyna
22 Lalas
Coach: Sampson

text: Group F final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 Germany
3
2
1
0
6
2
+4
7
Advance to knockout stage

2
 Yugoslavia
3
2
1
0
4
2
+2
7

3
 Iran
3
1
0
2
2
4
−2
3

4
 United States
3
0
0
3
1
5
−4
0

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (CEST/UTC+2)

text: Germany  v  United States

text:
June 15, 1998
9:00 p.m.
Group F

text:
Germany
2–0
 United States

Report

text:
Parc des Princes, Paris
Attendance: 45,500
Referee: Said Belqola (Morocco)

text: United States  v  Iran

text:
June 21, 1998
9:00 p.m.
Group F

text:
United States
1–2
 Iran

Report

text:
Stade de Gerland, Lyon
Attendance: 39,100
Referee: Urs Meier (Switzerland)

text: United States  v  Yugoslavia

text:
June 25, 1998
9:00 p.m.
Group F

text:
United States
0–1
 Yugoslavia

Report

text:
Stade de la Beaujoire, Nantes
Attendance: 35,500
Referee: Gamal Al-Ghandour (Egypt)

text: Korea-Japan 2002[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 2002 FIFA World Cup

1 Friedel
2 Hejduk
3 Berhalter
4 Mastroeni
5 O'Brien
6 Regis
7 Lewis
8 Stewart
9 Moore
10 Reyna (c)
11 Mathis
12 Agoos
13 Jones
14 Cherundolo
15 Wolff
16 Llamosa
17 Beasley
18 Keller
19 Meola
20 McBride
21 Donovan
22 Sanneh
23 Pope
Coach: Arena

text: Group D final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 South Korea (H)
3
2
1
0
4
1
+3
7
Advance to knockout stage

2
 United States
3
1
1
1
5
6
−1
4

3
 Portugal
3
1
0
2
6
4
+2
3

4
 Poland
3
1
0
2
3
7
−4
3

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (UTC+9)

text: United States  v  Portugal

text:
June 5, 2002
6:00 p.m.
Group D

text:
United States
3–2
 Portugal

Report

text:
Suwon World Cup Stadium, Suwon
Attendance: 37,306
Referee: Byron Moreno (Ecuador)

text: South Korea  v  United States

text:
June 10, 2002
3:30 p.m.
Group D

text:
South Korea
1–1
 United States

Report

text:
Daegu World Cup Stadium, Daegu
Attendance: 60,778
Referee: Urs Meier (Switzerland)

text: Poland  v  United States

text:
June 14, 2002
8:30 p.m.
Group D

text:
Poland
3–1
 United States

Report

text:
Daejeon World Cup Stadium, Daejeon
Attendance: 26,482
Referee: Lu Jun (China)

text: Mexico  v  United States

text:
June 17, 2002
3:30 p.m.
Round of 16

text:
Mexico
0–2
 United States

Report

text:
Jeonju World Cup Stadium, Jeonju
Attendance: 36,380
Referee: Vítor Melo Pereira (Portugal)

text: Germany  v  United States

text:
June 21, 2002
8:30 p.m.
QF

text:
Germany
1–0
 United States

Report

text:
Munsu Cup Stadium, Ulsan
Attendance: 37,337
Referee: Hugh Dallas (Scotland)

text: Germany 2006[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 2006 FIFA World Cup

1 Howard
2 Albright
3 Bocanegra
4 Mastroeni
5 O'Brien
6 Cherundolo
7 Lewis
8 Dempsey
9 Johnson
10 Reyna (c)
11 Ching
12 Berhalter
13 Conrad
14 Olsen
15 Convey
16 Wolff
17 Beasley
18 Keller
19 Hahnemann
20 McBride
21 Donovan
22 Onyewu
23 Pope
Coach: Arena

text: Group E final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 Italy
3
2
1
0
5
1
+4
7
Advance to knockout stage

2
 Ghana
3
2
0
1
4
3
+1
6

3
 Czech Republic
3
1
0
2
3
4
−1
3

4
 United States
3
0
1
2
2
6
−4
1

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (CEST/UTC+2)

text: United States  v  Czech Republic

text:
June 12, 2006
6:00 p.m.
Group E

text:
United States
0–3
 Czech Republic

Report

text:
FIFA WM Stadion Gelsenkirchen, Gelsenkirchen
Attendance: 52,000
Referee: Carlos Amarilla (Paraguay)

text: Italy  v  United States

text:
June 17, 12006
9:00 p.m.
Group E

text:
Italy
1–1
 United States

Report

text:
Fritz-Walter-Stadion, Kaiserslautern
Attendance: 46,000
Referee: Jorge Larrionda (Uruguay)

text: Ghana  v  United States

text:
June 22, 2006
4:00 p.m.
Group E

text:
Ghana
2–1
 United States

Report

text:
FIFA WM Stadion Nürnberg, Nuremberg
Attendance: 41,000
Referee: Markus Merk (Germany)

text: South Africa 2010[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 2010 FIFA World Cup

1 Howard
2 Spector
3 Bocanegra (c)
4 M. Bradley
5 Onyewu
6 Cherundolo
7 Beasley
8 Dempsey
9 Gomez
10 Donovan
11 Holden
12 Bornstein
13 Clark
14 Buddle
15 DeMerit
16 Torres
17 Altidore
18 Guzan
19 Edu
20 Findley
21 Goodson
22 Feilhaber
23 Hahnemann
Coach: B. Bradley

text: Group C final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 United States
3
1
2
0
4
3
+1
5
Advance to knockout stage

2
 England
3
1
2
0
2
1
+1
5

3
 Slovenia
3
1
1
1
3
3
0
4

4
 Algeria
3
0
1
2
0
2
−2
1

text: Games[edit]

text: All times local (UTC+02)

text: England  v  United States

text:
June 12, 2010
8:30 p.m.
Group C

text:
England
1–1
 United States

Report

text:
Royal Bafokeng Stadium, Rustenburg
Attendance: 38,646
Referee: Carlos Simon (Brazil)[4]

text: Slovenia  v  United States

text:
June 18, 2010
4:00 p.m.
Group C

text:
Slovenia
2–2
 United States

Report

text:
Ellis Park Stadium, Johannesburg
Attendance: 45,573
Referee: Koman Coulibaly (Mali)[5]

text: United States  v  Algeria

text:
June 23, 2010
4:00 p.m.
Group C

text:
United States
1–0
 Algeria

Report

text:
Loftus Versfeld Stadium, Pretoria
Attendance: 35,827
Referee: Frank De Bleeckere (Belgium)

text: United States  v  Ghana

text:
June 26, 2010
8:30 p.m.
Round of 16

text:
United States
1–2 (a.e.t.)
 Ghana

Report

text:
Royal Bafokeng Stadium, Rustenburg
Attendance: 34,976
Referee: Viktor Kassai (Hungary)

text: Brazil 2014[edit]

text:
[show]

v
t
e

United States squad – 2014 FIFA World Cup

1 Howard
2 Yedlin
3 Gonzalez
4 Bradley
5 Besler
6 Brooks
7 Beasley
8 Dempsey (c)
9 Jóhannsson
10 Diskerud
11 Bedoya
12 Guzan
13 Jones
14 Davis
15 Beckerman
16 Green
17 Altidore
18 Wondolowski
19 Zusi
20 Cameron
21 Chandler
22 Rimando
23 Johnson
Coach: Klinsmann

text: Group G final standings[edit]

text:
Pos
Team

v
t
e

Pld
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
Qualification

1
 Germany
3
2
1
0
7
2
+5
7
Advance to knockout stage

2
 United States
3
1
1
1
4
4
0
4

3
 Portugal
3
1
1
1
4
7
−3
4

4
 Ghana
3
0
1
2
4
6
−2
1

text: Games[edit]

text: Ghana  v  United States

text:
June 16, 2014
7:00 p.m. UTC−3
Group G

text:
Ghana
1–2
 United States

Report

text:
Arena das Dunas, Natal
Attendance: 39,760
Referee: Jonas Eriksson (Sweden)

text: United States  v  Portugal

text:
June 22, 2014
6:00 p.m. UTC−4
Group G

text:
United States
2–2
 Portugal

Report

text:
Arena da Amazônia, Manaus
Attendance: 40,123
Referee: Néstor Pitana (Argentina)

text: United States  v  Germany

text:
June 26, 2014
1:00 p.m. UTC−3
Group G

text:
United States
0–1
 Germany

Report

text:
Arena Pernambuco, Recife
Attendance: 41,876
Referee: Ravshan Irmatov (Uzbekistan)

text: Belgium  v  United States

text:
July 1, 2014
5:00 p.m. UTC−3
Round of 16

text:
Belgium
2–1 (a.e.t.)
 United States

Report

text:
Arena Fonte Nova, Salvador
Attendance: 51,227
Referee: Djamel Haimoudi (Algeria)


document_title: Samuel Adams (beer)

question_text: what kind of beer is sam adams boston lager

text: Samuel Adams (beer)

text: Samuel Adams Boston Lager[edit]

text: Following Jim Koch’s great-great grandfather’s recipe, Samuel Adams continued to use traditional brewing processes, including decoction mash (a four vessel process) and krausening (a secondary fermentation). Boston Lager is also dry hopped using the Hallertau Mittelfrueh and Tettnang Tettnanger hops.[4]

text: Seasonal offerings[edit]

text: In addition to year-round offerings, Samuel Adams also has four seasonal offerings. The spring seasonal beers are Cold Snap, a Witbier and Escape Route, a Kölsch. The spring seasonals are sold from January to March. The Summer offerings are available from April through August and include Summer Ale, a wheat ale and Porch Rocker, a radler. The Autumn seasonal beers are available August through October and are Octoberfest, a Marzen and Pumpkin Batch, a saison. The Winter/Holiday seasonal beers are available November through December and are, Winter Lager, a Bock and White Christmas an Ale.[5]

text: Samuel Adams also offers seasonal variety packs which include a mix of year-round and seasonal offerings.[5][6]

text: Other variants[edit]

text: Samuel Adams Rebel IPA[edit]

text: First brewed in 2014, Samuel Adams Rebel IPA is a West Coast style India Pale Ale. The beer is brewed with five American hops - American Cascade, Simcoe, Chinook, Centennial, and Amarillo.[7] In early 2015, Samuel Adams released Rebel Rouser, a double India Pale Ale, and Rebel Rider, a session India Pale Ale. There are five flavor options in the Rebel Family; Rebel Juiced IPA, Rebel Grapefruit IPA, Repel Rouser IPA, Rebel Cascade IPA, and Rebel Raw IPA.

text: Sam Adams Light[edit]

text: Introduced in 2001 Sam Adams Light was the second light beer the company brewed. The company previously sold Boston Lightship which was introduced in 1993.[8]

text: Samuel Adams Barrel Room Collection[edit]

text: These Belgian style beers are left in large wood barrels to age and pick up some of the flavors of the wood.[9] The beers in this collection include American Kriek, New World, Stony Brook Red, Thirteenth Hour and Tetravis.[10]

text: Hopscape[edit]

text: There are currently nine brews of this variant available: Fresh as Helles, Ella Blanc IPL, Noble Pils, Winter Lager, White Christmas, Octoberfest, Cold Snap, Summer Ale, and Porch Rocker.[11]

text: Nitro Project[edit]

text: Originally brewed in a nano brewery in 2014, the Nitro Project is a collection of two styles that are infused with nitrogen gas in the carbonation process. The two brews are Nitro Coffee Stout and Nitro White Ale. There was also a third style, Nitro IPA, which is not currently brewed. In a Boston Globe article, Jim Koch describes the process of infusing the nitrogen as "difficult".[12]

text: Samuel Adams Utopias[edit]

text: The company followed this up in 2002 with Utopias; at 24% abv, it was marketed as the strongest commercial beer in the world (a mark that has since been challenged). The company subsequently released new "vintages" of Utopias annually, increasing the alcoholic content to 27% abv by 2007.

text: Utopias is made with caramel, Vienna, Moravian and Bavarian smoked malts, and four varieties of noble hops: Hallertauer Mittelfrüh, Tettnanger, Spalter, and Saaz hops. The beer is matured in scotch, cognac and port barrels for the better part of a year. A limited number of bottles are released each year; in 2007, only 12,000 bottles were produced, and in 2009, only 9,000 bottles were released.[13][14] Sold in a ceramic bottle resembling a copper-finished brewing kettle, a single bottle of Utopias cost $100 in 2002, and $150 in 2009.

text: Because of legal restrictions, Utopias is not offered in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont, or West Virginia.[15]

text: Collections[edit]

text:
Collections
Brews
Style
Availability

Boston Lager
1
Lager
Year Round

Hopscape
9
Wheat Ale
Seasonal

Rebel IPA
5
India Pale Ale
Year Round

Nitro Project
2
Coffee Stout
Year Round

Boston Ale
6
Stock Ale
Year Round

Utopias
4

Limited Release

Cosmic Mother Funk Grand Cru
5
Belgian Style Ale
Limited Release

text: The Brewery[edit]

text: The Boston Brewery opened in 1989 and it is where every beer was first made, aside from the Boston Lager. There are two other breweries in Cincinnati, OH and Lehigh Valley, PA. Only the Boston Brewery is open for public tours and tastings.[16] The Boston Brewery tour is free, and only guests 21 years of age and older are allowed to sample on the tour. [17]

text: Media[edit]

text: Samuel Adams beer has gained attention in the media for its various beers. In a list of "Best Christmas/Winter Beer in Each State", Samuel Adams' Fezziwig brew won in the state of Massachusetts.[18] Additionally, Samuel Adams brewery itself was named the best brewery in all of Massachusetts according to a Yelp-based Buzzed article.[19]


document_title: Hundred Years' War

question_text: who inspired the french to win the hundred years war against the english by 1453

question_tokens: who inspired the french to win the hundred years war against the english by 1453

text: Hundred Years' War

text: Origin of the conflict[edit]

text: The root causes of the conflict can be found in the demographic, economic and political crises of 14th century Europe. The outbreak of war was motivated by a gradual rise in tension between the kings of France and England about Gascony, Flanders and Scotland. The dynastic question, which arose due to an interruption of the direct male line of the Capetians, was the official pretext.

text: Dynastic turmoil in France: 1316–1328[edit]

text: The question of female succession to the French throne was raised after the death of Louis X in 1316. Louis X left only a daughter, and his posthumous son John I lived only a few days. Furthermore, the paternity of his daughter was in question, as her mother, Margaret of Burgundy, had been exposed as an adulterer in the Tour de Nesle affair. Philip, Count of Poitiers, brother of Louis X, positioned himself to take the crown, advancing the stance that women should be ineligible to succeed to the French throne. Through his political sagacity he won over his adversaries and succeeded to the French throne as Philip V. By the same law that he procured, his daughters were denied the succession, which passed to his younger brother, Charles IV, in 1322.[1]

text:
Philip III King of Francer. 1270–1285

Philip IV King of France King of Navarrer. 1285–1314Charles of FranceCount of Valoisd. 1325Louis of France  Count of Evreux(1276–1319)

Louis X King of France King of Navarre  r. 1314–1316Philip V King of France King of Navarre  r. 1316–1322Charles IV King of France King of Navarre  r. 1322–1328IsabellaEdward II King of EnglandPhilip VI King of Francer. 1328–1350Philip of Evreux  King of Navarre as Philip IIIr. 1328 – 1343

Joan II Queen of Navarreb. 1312Joan III of Burgundyb. 1308Edward III King of Englandb. 1312

Charles of Évreux  King of Navarre as Charles IIb. 1332Philip of Burgundyb. 1323

text: Charles IV died in 1328, leaving a daughter and a pregnant wife. If the unborn child was male, he would become king; if not, Charles left the choice of his successor to the nobles. A girl ended up being born, therefore rendering the main male line of the House of Capet extinct.

text: By proximity of blood, the nearest male relative of Charles IV was his nephew Edward III of England. Edward was the son of Isabella, the sister of the dead Charles IV, but the question arose whether she should be able to transmit a right to inherit that she did not herself possess. The French nobility, moreover, balked at the prospect of being ruled by Isabelle and her lover Roger Mortimer, who were widely suspected of having murdered the previous English king, Edward II. The assemblies of the French barons and prelates and the University of Paris decided that males who derive their right to inheritance through their mother should be excluded. Thus the nearest heir through male ancestry was Charles IV's first cousin, Philip, Count of Valois, and it was decided that he should be crowned Philip VI. In 1340 the Avignon papacy confirmed that under Salic law males should not be able to inherit through their mothers.[1][2]

text: Eventually, Edward III reluctantly recognized Philip VI and paid him homage for his French fiefs. He made concessions in Guyenne, but reserved the right to reclaim territories arbitrarily confiscated. After that, he expected to be left undisturbed while he made war on Scotland.

text: The dispute over Guyenne: a problem of sovereignty[edit]

text: Tensions between the French and English monarchies can be traced back to the 1066 Norman conquest of England, in which the English throne was seized by the Duke of Normandy, a vassal of the King of France. As a result, the crown of England was held by a succession of nobles who already owned lands in France, which put them among the most powerful subjects of the French king, as they could now draw upon the economic power of England to enforce their interests in the mainland. To the kings of France, this dangerously threatened their royal authority, and so they would constantly try to undermine English rule in France, while the English monarchs would struggle to protect and expand their lands. This clash of interests was the root cause of much of the conflict between the French and English monarchies throughout the medieval era.

text: The Anglo-Norman dynasty that had ruled England since the Norman conquest of 1066 was brought to an end when Henry, the son of Geoffrey of Anjou and Empress Matilda and great-grandson of William the Conqueror, became the first of the Angevin kings of England in 1154 as Henry II.[3] The Angevin kings directly ruled over more French territory than the kings of France. However, they still owed homage for these territories to the French king. From the 11th century onward, the Angevins had autonomy within their French domains, effectively neutralizing the issue.[4]

text: King John of England inherited the Angevin domains from his brother Richard I. However, Philip II of France acted decisively to exploit the weaknesses of John, both legally and militarily, and by 1204 had succeeded in taking control of much of the Angevin continental possessions. Following John's reign, the Battle of Bouvines (1214), the Saintonge War (1242), and finally the War of Saint-Sardos (1324), the English king's holdings on the continent, as Duke of Aquitaine (Guyenne), were limited roughly to provinces in Gascony.[5]

text: The dispute over Guyenne is even more important than the dynastic question in explaining the outbreak of the war. Guyenne posed a significant problem to the kings of France and England: Edward III was a vassal of Philip VI of France because of his French possessions and was required to recognize the suzerainty of the King of France over them. In practical terms, a judgment in Guyenne might be subject to an appeal to the French royal court. The King of France had the power to revoke all legal decisions made by the King of England in Aquitaine, which was unacceptable to the English. Therefore, sovereignty over Guyenne was a latent conflict between the two monarchies for several generations.

text: During the War of Saint-Sardos, Charles of Valois, father of Philip VI, invaded Aquitaine on behalf of Charles IV and conquered the duchy after a local insurrection, which the French believed had been incited by Edward II of England. Charles IV grudgingly agreed to return this territory in 1325. To recover his duchy, Edward II had to compromise: he sent his son, the future Edward III, to pay homage.

text: The King of France agreed to restore Guyenne, minus Agen. But the French delayed the return of the lands, which helped Philip VI. On 6 June 1329, Edward III finally paid homage to the King of France. However, at the ceremony, Philip VI had it recorded that the homage was not due to the fiefs detached from the duchy of Guyenne by Charles IV (especially Agen). For Edward, the homage did not imply the renunciation of his claim to the extorted lands.

text: Gascony under the King of England[edit]

text: In the 11th century, Gascony in southwest France had been incorporated into Aquitaine (also known as Guyenne or Guienne) and formed with it the province of Guyenne and Gascony (French: Guyenne-et-Gascogne). The Angevin kings of England became Dukes of Aquitaine after Henry II married the former Queen of France, Eleanor of Aquitaine, in 1152, from which point the lands were held in vassalage to the French crown. By the 13th century the terms Aquitaine, Guyenne and Gascony were virtually synonymous.[6][7] At the beginning of Edward III's reign on 1 February 1327, the only part of Aquitaine that remained in his hands was the Duchy of Gascony. The term Gascony came to be used for the territory held by the Angevin (Plantagenet) Kings of England in southwest France, although they still used the title Duke of Aquitaine.[7][8]

text: For the first 10 years of Edward III's reign, Gascony had been a major point of friction. The English argued that, as Charles IV had not acted in a proper way towards his tenant, Edward should be able to hold the duchy free of any French suzerainty. This argument was rejected by the French, so in 1329, the 17-year-old Edward III paid homage to Philip VI. Tradition demanded that vassals approach their liege unarmed with heads bare. Edward protested by attending the ceremony wearing his crown and sword.[9] Even after this pledge of homage, the French continued to pressure the English administration.[10]

text: Gascony was not the only sore point. One of Edward's influential advisers was Robert III of Artois. Robert was an exile from the French court, having fallen out with Philip VI over an inheritance claim. He urged Edward to start a war to reclaim France, and was able to provide extensive intelligence on the French court.[11]

text: Franco-Scot alliance[edit]

text: France was an ally of the Kingdom of Scotland as English kings had for some time tried to subjugate the area. In 1295, a treaty was signed between France and Scotland during the reign of Philip the Fair. Charles IV formally renewed the treaty in 1326, promising Scotland that France would support the Scots if England invaded their country. Similarly, France would have Scotland's support if its own kingdom was attacked. Edward could not succeed in his plans for Scotland if the Scots could count on French support.[12]

text: Philip VI had assembled a large naval fleet off Marseilles as part of an ambitious plan for a crusade to the Holy Land. However, the plan was abandoned and the fleet, including elements of the Scottish Navy, moved to the English Channel off Normandy in 1336, threatening England.[11] To deal with this crisis, Edward proposed that the English raise two armies, one to deal with the Scots "at a suitable time", the other to proceed at once to Gascony. At the same time, ambassadors were to be sent to France with a proposed treaty for the French king.[13]

text: Beginning of the war: 1337–1360[edit]

text:
showvteHundred Years' WarEdwardian phase
 (1337–60)
Cadzand
Arnemuiden
English Channel
Sluys
Saint-Omer
Tournai
Bergerac
Auberoche
Caen
Blanchetaque
Crécy
Calais
Neville's Cross
Lunalonge
Calais
Winchelsea
Saintes
Ardres
Poitiers
Jacquerie
Reims Campaign
Chartres

text: End of homage[edit]

text: At the end of April 1337, Philip of France was invited to meet the delegation from England but refused. The arrière-ban, literally a call to arms, was proclaimed throughout France starting on 30 April 1337. Philip then met with his Great Council in Paris. On 24 May 1337, it was agreed that the Duchy of Aquitaine, effectively Gascony, should be taken back into the king's hands on the grounds that Edward III was in breach of his obligations as vassal and had sheltered the king's 'mortal enemy' Robert d'Artois.[14] Edward responded to the confiscation of Aquitaine by challenging Philip's right to the French throne. When Charles IV died, Edward had made a claim for the succession of the French throne, through the right of his mother Isabella (Charles IV's sister), daughter of Philip IV. Any claim was considered invalidated by Edward's homage to Philip VI in 1329. Edward revived his claim and in 1340 formally assumed the title 'King of France and the French Royal Arms'.[15]

text: On 26 January 1340, Edward III formally received homage from Guy, half-brother of the Count of Flanders. The civic authorities of Ghent, Ypres and Bruges proclaimed Edward King of France. Edward's purpose was to strengthen his alliances with the Low Countries. His supporters would be able to claim that they were loyal to the "true" King of France and were not rebels against Philip. In February 1340, Edward returned to England to try to raise more funds and also deal with political difficulties.[16]

text: Relations with Flanders were also tied to the English wool trade, since Flanders' principal cities relied heavily on textile production and England supplied much of the raw material they needed. Edward III had commanded that his chancellor sit on the woolsack in council as a symbol of the pre-eminence of the wool trade.[17] At the time there were about 110,000 sheep in Sussex alone.[18] The great medieval English monasteries produced large surpluses of wool that were sold to mainland Europe. Successive governments were able to make large amounts of money by taxing it.[17] France's sea power led to economic disruptions for England, shrinking the wool trade to Flanders and the wine trade from Gascony.[19][20]

text: Outbreak, the English Channel and Brittany[edit]

text: On 22 June 1340, Edward and his fleet sailed from England and arrived off the Zwin estuary the next day. The French fleet assumed a defensive formation off the port of Sluis. The English fleet deceived the French into believing they were withdrawing. When the wind turned in the late afternoon, the English attacked with the wind and sun behind them. The French fleet was almost completely destroyed in what became known as the Battle of Sluys. England dominated the English Channel for the rest of the war, preventing French invasions.[16] At this point, Edward's funds ran out and the war probably would have ended were it not for the death of the Duke of Brittany precipitating a succession dispute between the duke's half brother John of Montfort and Charles of Blois, nephew of Philip VI.[21]

text: In 1341, conflict over the succession to the Duchy of Brittany began the War of the Breton Succession, in which Edward backed John of Montfort and Philip backed Charles of Blois. Action for the next few years focused around a back and forth struggle in Brittany. The city of Vannes in Brittany changed hands several times, while further campaigns in Gascony met with mixed success for both sides.[21]  The English backed Montfort finally succeeded in taking the duchy but not until in 1364.[22]

text: Battle of Crécy and the taking of Calais[edit]

text: In July 1346, Edward mounted a major invasion across the channel, landing in Normandy's Cotentin, at St. Vaast. The English army captured the completely unguarded Caen in just one day, surprising the French. Philip mustered a large army to oppose Edward, who chose to march northward toward the Low Countries, pillaging as he went. He reached the river Seine to find most of the crossings destroyed.  He moved further and further south, worryingly close to Paris, until he found the crossing at Poissy. This had only been partially destroyed, so the carpenters within his army were able to fix it. He then continued on his way to Flanders until he reached the river Somme. The army crossed at a tidal ford at Blanchetaque, leaving Philip's army stranded. Edward, assisted by this head start, continued on his way to Flanders once more, until, finding himself unable to outmanoeuvre Philip, Edward positioned his forces for battle and Philip's army attacked.

text: The Battle of Crécy was a complete disaster for the French, largely credited to the longbowmen and the French king, who allowed his army to attack before it was ready.[23] Philip appealed to his Scottish allies to help with a diversionary attack on England. King David II of Scotland responded by invading northern England, but his army was defeated and he was captured at the Battle of Neville's Cross, on 17 October 1346. This greatly reduced the threat from Scotland.[21][24] In France, Edward proceeded north unopposed and besieged the city of Calais on the English Channel, capturing it in 1347. This became an important strategic asset for the English, allowing them to safely keep troops in northern France.[23] Calais would remain under English control, even after the end of the Hundred Years' War, until the successful French siege in 1558.[25]

text: Battle of Poitiers[edit]

text: In 1348, the Black Death, which had just arrived in Paris, began to ravage Europe.[26] In 1355, after the plague had passed and England was able to recover financially,[citation needed] King Edward's son and namesake, the Prince of Wales, later known as the Black Prince, led a Chevauchée from Gascony into France, during which he pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary, sacked Carcassonne, and plundered Narbonne. The next year during another Chevauchée he ravaged Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry  but failed to take Bourges. He offered terms of peace to King John II of France (known as John the Good), who had outflanked him near Poitiers, but refused to surrender himself as the price of their acceptance. This led to the Battle of Poitiers (19 September 1356) where his army routed the French.[27] During the battle, the Gascon noble Jean de Grailly, captal de Buch led a mounted unit that was concealed in a forest. The French advance was contained, at which point de Grailly led a flanking movement with his horsemen cutting off the French retreat and succeeding in capturing King John and many of his nobles.[28][29] With John held hostage, his son the Dauphin (later to become Charles V) assumed the powers of the king as regent.[30]

text: After the Battle of Poitiers, many French nobles and mercenaries rampaged, and chaos ruled. A contemporary report recounted:

text:
... all went ill with the kingdom and the State was undone. Thieves and robbers rose up everywhere in the land. The Nobles despised and hated all others and took no thought for usefulness and profit of lord and men. They subjected and despoiled the peasants and the men of the villages. In no wise did they defend their country from its enemies; rather did they trample it underfoot, robbing and pillaging the peasants' goods ...
From the Chronicles of Jean de Venette[31]

text: Reims Campaign and Black Monday[edit]

text: Edward invaded France, for the third and last time, hoping to capitalise on the discontent and seize the throne. The Dauphin's strategy was that of non-engagement with the English army in the field. However, Edward wanted the crown and chose the cathedral city of Reims for his coronation (Reims was the traditional coronation city).[32] However, the citizens of Reims built and reinforced the city's defences before Edward and his army arrived.[33] Edward besieged the city for five weeks, but the defences held and there was no coronation.[32] Edward moved on to Paris, but retreated after a few skirmishes in the suburbs. Next was the town of Chartres. Disaster struck in a freak hailstorm on the encamped army, causing over 1,000 English deaths – the so-called Black Monday on Easter 1360. This devastated Edward's army and forced him to negotiate when approached by the French.[34] A conference was held at Brétigny that resulted in the Treaty of Brétigny (8 May 1360).[35] The treaty was ratified at Calais in October. In return for increased lands in Aquitaine, Edward renounced Normandy, Touraine, Anjou and Maine and consented to reduce King John's ransom by a million crowns. Edward also abandoned his claim to the crown of France.[28][30][36]

text: First peace: 1360–1369[edit]

text: The French king, John II, had been held captive in England. The Treaty of Brétigny set his ransom at 3 million crowns and allowed for hostages to be held in lieu of John. The hostages included two of his sons, several princes and nobles, four inhabitants of Paris, and two citizens from each of the nineteen principal towns of France. While these hostages were held, John returned to France to try and raise funds to pay the ransom. In 1362 John's son Louis of Anjou, a hostage in English-held Calais, escaped captivity. So, with his stand-in hostage gone, John felt honor-bound to return to captivity in England.[30][36]

text: The French crown had been at odds with Navarre (near southern Gascony) since 1354, and in 1363 the Navarrese used the captivity of John II in London and the political weakness of the Dauphin to try to seize power.[37] Although there was no formal treaty, Edward III supported the Navarrese moves, particularly as there was a prospect that he might gain control over the northern and western provinces as a consequence. With this in mind, Edward deliberately slowed the peace negotiations.[38] In 1364, John II died in London, while still in honourable captivity.[39] Charles V succeeded him as king of France.[30][40] On 7 May 1364, one month after the dauphin's accession and three days before his coronation as Charles V, the Navarrese suffered a crushing defeat at the Battle of Cocherel.[41]

text: French ascendancy under Charles V: 1369–1389[edit]

text:
showvteHundred Years' WarCaroline phase·
 (1369–89)
Cocherel
Limoges
Pontvallain
La Rochelle
Chiset
Roosebeke

text: Aquitaine and Castile[edit]

text: In 1366 there was a civil war of succession in Castile (part of modern Spain). The forces of the ruler Peter of Castile were pitched against those of his half-brother Henry of Trastámara. The English crown supported Peter; the French supported Henry. French forces were led by Bertrand du Guesclin, a Breton, who rose from relatively humble beginnings to prominence as one of France's war leaders. Charles V provided a force of 12,000, with du Guesclin at their head, to support Trastámara in his invasion of Castile.[44]

text: Peter appealed to England and Aquitaine's Black Prince for help, but none was forthcoming, forcing Peter into exile in Aquitaine. The Black Prince had previously agreed to support Peter's claims but concerns over the terms of the treaty of Brétigny led him to assist Peter as a representative of Aquitaine, rather than England. He then led an Anglo-Gascon army into Castille. Peter was restored to power after Trastámara's army was defeated at the Battle of Nájera.[45]

text: Although the Castilians had agreed to fund the Black Prince, they failed to do so. The Prince was suffering from ill health and returned with his army to Aquitaine. To pay off debts incurred during the Castille campaign, the prince instituted a hearth tax. Arnaud-Amanieu VIII, Lord of Albret had fought on the Black Prince's side during the war. Albret, who already had become discontented by the influx of English administrators into the enlarged Aquitaine, refused to allow the tax to be collected in his fief. He then joined a group of Gascon lords who appealed to Charles V for support in their refusal to pay the tax. Charles V summoned one Gascon lord and the Black Prince to hear the case in his High Court in Paris. The Black Prince answered that he would go to Paris with sixty thousand men behind him. War broke out again and Edward III resumed the title of King of France.[46] Charles V declared that all the English possessions in France were forfeited, and before the end of 1369 all of Aquitaine was in full revolt.[46][47]

text: With the Black Prince gone from Castile, Henry de Trastámara led a second invasion that ended with Peter's death at the Battle of Montiel in March 1369. The new Castilian regime provided naval support to French campaigns against Aquitaine and England.[45]

text: In 1373, the combined Castilian and French fleets sacked the Isle of Wight. In 1377, they burned Rye and Hastings and sacked Lewes, Folkestone, Portsmouth, Dartmouth, and Plymouth. In 1378, the Castilian galleys raided Cornwall, burning coastal towns and levying tribute.[48] The following year the Castilians conquered the Castle of La Roche Guyon on the Breton coast. In July 1380, Fernando Sánchez de Tovar led a Franco-Castilian fleet from La Rochelle in an attack on Jersey and Guernsey, followed by an August raid into the Thames Estuary. The raiders burned Gravesend, while the Londoners watched the flames from a distance.[49]

text: 1373 campaign of John of Gaunt[edit]

text: In August 1373, John of Gaunt, accompanied by John de Montfort, Duke of Brittany led a force of 9,000 men out from Calais on a major chevauchée.  While initially successful as French forces were insufficiently concentrated to oppose them, the English began to meet further resistance as they moved south.  French forces began to concentrate around the English force but, under specific orders from King Charles V, the French avoided a set battle.  Instead, they fell on forces detached from the main body to raid or forage. The French shadowed the English and in October, the English found themselves being trapped against the River Allier by four separate French forces.  With some difficulty, the English crossed at the bridge at Moulins but lost all their baggage and loot.  The English carried on south across the Limousin plateau but the weather was turning severe.  Men and horses died in great numbers and many soldiers, forced to march on foot, discarded their armour.  At the beginning of December, the army finally entered friendly territory in Gascony.  By the end of December they were in Bordeaux, starving, ill-equipped and having lost over half of the 30,000 horses with which they had left Calais.  Although the march across France had been a remarkable feat, it was a military failure.[50]

text: English turmoil[edit]

text: With his health continuing to deteriorate, the Black Prince returned to England in January 1371, whereby now his father Edward III was elderly and also in poor health. The prince's illness was debilitating, and he died on 8 June 1376.[51]

text: Edward III died the following year on 21 June 1377;[52] he was succeeded by the Black Prince's second son Richard II (the first son had died sometime earlier), who was still a child.[53] The treaty at Brétigny left Edward III and England with enlarged holdings in France; however, a small professional French army under the leadership of du Guesclin pushed the English back and, by the time of Charles V's death in 1380, the English only held Calais and a few other coastal cities.[54]

text: It was usual to appoint a regent in the case of a child monarch, but no regent was appointed for Richard II, who nominally exercised the power of kingship from the date of his accession in 1377.[53] However, between 1377 and 1380, actual power was in the hands of a series of councils. The political community preferred this to a regency led by the king's uncle, John of Gaunt, although Gaunt remained highly influential.[53]

text: Richard faced many challenges during his reign, including the Peasants' Revolt led by Wat Tyler in 1381 and an Anglo-Scottish war in 1384–1385. His attempts to raise taxes to pay for his Scottish adventure and for the protection of Calais against the French made him increasingly unpopular.[53]

text: 1380 campaign of the Earl of Buckingham[edit]

text: In July 1380, the Earl of Buckingham commanded an expedition to France to aid England's ally, the Duke of Brittany. The French refused battle before the walls of Troyes on 25 August, so Buckingham's forces continued their chevauchée and in November laid siege to Nantes.[55] However, expected support from the Duke of Brittany did not appear and, in the face of heavy losses in both men and horses, was forced to abandon the siege in January 1381.[56] In February 1381, now reconciled to the regime of the new French king Charles VI, Brittany paid 50,000 francs to Buckingham for him to abandon the siege and the campaign.[57]

text: French turmoil[edit]

text: After the deaths of Charles V and du Guesclin in 1380, France lost its main leadership and overall momentum in the war. Charles VI succeeded his father as king of France at the age of 11, and he was thus put under a regency led by his uncles, who managed to maintain an effective grip on government affairs until about 1388, well after Charles had achieved royal majority.

text: With France facing widespread destruction, plague, and economic recession, high taxation put a heavy burden on the French peasantry and urban communities. The war effort against England largely depended on royal taxation, but the population was increasingly unwilling to pay for it, as would be demonstrated at the Harelle and Maillotin revolts in 1382. Charles V had abolished many of these taxes on his deathbed, but subsequent attempts to reinstate them stirred up hostility between the French government and populace.

text: Difficulties in raising taxes and revenue hampered the ability of the French to fight the English. At this point, the war's pace had largely slowed down, and both nations found themselves fighting mainly through proxy wars, such as during the 1383–1385 Portuguese interregnum. The independence party in the Kingdom of Portugal, which was supported by the English, won against the supporters of the King of Castile's claim to the Portuguese throne, who in turn was backed by the French.

text: Second peace: 1389–1415[edit]

text:
showvteOwain Glyndŵr's Revolt
Mynydd Hyddgen
Tuthill
Bryn Glas
Shrewsbury
Stalling Down
Grosmont
Pwll Melyn

text: The war became increasingly unpopular with the English public largely due to the high taxes needed to sustain it. These taxes were seen as one of the reasons for the Peasants' revolt.[58] Richard's increasing disinterest in the war together with his preferential treatment of a select few close friends and advisors angered an alliance of lords that included one of his uncles. This group, known as Lords Appellant, managed to successfully press charges of treason against five of Richard's advisors and friends in the Merciless Parliament. The Lords Appellant were able to gain control of the council in 1388 and tried, unsuccessfully, to reignite the war in France. Although the will was there, the funds to pay the troops was lacking, so in the autumn of 1388 the Council agreed to resume negotiations with the French crown, beginning on 18 June 1389 with the signing of a three-year truce at Leulinghen.[58][59]

text: In 1389, Richard's uncle and supporter, John of Gaunt, returned from Spain and Richard was able to rebuild his power gradually until 1397, when he reasserted his authority and destroyed the principal three among the Lords Appellant. In 1399, after John of Gaunt died, Richard II disinherited Gaunt's son, the exiled Henry of Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke returned to England with his supporters and deposed Richard and had himself crowned Henry IV.[53][59][60]

text: In Scotland, the problems brought in by the English regime change prompted border raids that were countered by an invasion in 1402 and the defeat of a Scottish army at the Battle of Homildon Hill.[61] A dispute over the spoils between Henry and Henry Percy, 1st Earl of Northumberland, resulted in a long and bloody struggle between the two for control of northern England, resolved only with the almost complete destruction of the Percy family by 1408.[62][63]

text: In Wales, Owain Glyndŵr was declared Prince of Wales on 16 September 1400. He was the leader of the most serious and widespread rebellion against English authority in Wales since the conquest of 1282–1283. In 1405, the French allied with Glyndŵr and the Castilians in Spain and a Franco-Welsh army advanced as far as Worcester, while the Spaniards used galleys to raid and burn all the way from Cornwall to Southampton, before taking refuge in Harfleur for the winter.[64] The rebellion was finally put down only in 1415 and resulted in Welsh semi-independence for a number of years.[65]

text: In 1392, Charles VI suddenly descended into madness, forcing France into a regency dominated by his uncles and his brother. An open conflict for control over the Regency began between his uncle Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, and his brother, Louis of Valois, Duke of Orléans. After Philip's death, his son and heir John the Fearless continued the struggle against Louis, but with the disadvantage of having no close personal relation to the king. Finding himself outmaneuvered politically, John ordered the assassination of Louis in retaliation. His involvement in the murder was quickly revealed, and the Armagnac family took political power in opposition to John. By 1410, both sides were bidding for the help of English forces in a civil war.[60] In 1418 Paris was taken by the Burgundians, who were unable to stop the massacre of Count of Armagnac and about 2,500 of his followers by a Parisian mob.[66]

text: Throughout this period, England confronted repeated raids by pirates that heavily damaged trade and the navy. There is some evidence that Henry IV used state-legalised piracy as a form of warfare in the English Channel. He used such privateering campaigns to pressure enemies without risking open war.[67] The French responded in kind and French pirates, under Scottish protection, raided many English coastal towns.[68]

text: The domestic and dynastic difficulties faced by England and France in this period quieted the war for a decade.[68]

text: Henry IV of England died in 1413 and was replaced by his eldest son Henry V. The mental illness of Charles VI of France allowed his power to be exercised by royal princes whose rivalries caused deep divisions in France. Henry V was well aware of these divisions and hoped to exploit them. In 1414 while he held court at Leicester, he received ambassadors from Burgundy.[69] Henry accredited envoys to the French king to make clear his territorial claims in France; he also demanded the hand of Charles VI's youngest daughter Catherine of Valois. The French rejected his demands, leading Henry to prepare for war.[69]

text: Resumption of the war under Henry V: 1415–1429[edit]

text:
showvteHundred Years' War  Lancastrian phase (1415–53)
Harfleur
Agincourt
Valmont
Rouen
2nd La Rochelle
Baugé
Meaux
Cravant
La Brossinière
Verneuil
St. James
Orléans
Herrings
Loire
Jargeau
Meung-sur-Loire
Beaugency
Patay
Reims
Paris
La Charité
Compiègne
Gerberoy
St. Denis
Calais
Tartas
Formigny
Castillon

text: Burgundy alliance and the seizure of Paris[edit]

text: Battle of Agincourt (1415)[edit]

text: In August 1415, Henry V sailed from England with a force of about 10,500 and laid siege to Harfleur. The city resisted for longer than expected, but finally surrendered on 22 September 1415. Because of the unexpected delay, most of the campaign season was gone. Rather than march on Paris directly, Henry elected to make a raiding expedition across France toward English-occupied Calais. In a campaign reminiscent of Crécy, he found himself outmaneuvered and low on supplies and had to fight a much larger French army at the Battle of Agincourt, north of the Somme. Despite the problems and having a smaller force, his victory was near-total; the French defeat was catastrophic, costing the lives of many of the Armagnac leaders. About 40% of the French nobility was killed.[70] Henry was apparently concerned that the large number of prisoners taken were a security risk (there were more French prisoners than there were soldiers in the entire English army) and he ordered their deaths.[69]

text: Treaty of Troyes (1420)[edit]

text: Henry retook much of Normandy, including Caen in 1417, and Rouen on 19 January 1419, turning Normandy English for the first time in two centuries. A formal alliance was made with the Duchy of Burgundy, which had taken Paris after the assassination of Duke John the Fearless in 1419. In 1420, Henry met with King Charles VI. They signed the Treaty of Troyes, by which Henry finally married Charles' daughter Catherine of Valois and Henry's heirs would inherit the throne of France. The Dauphin, Charles VII, was declared illegitimate. Henry formally entered Paris later that year and the agreement was ratified by the Estates-General.[69]

text: Death of Clarence (1421)[edit]

text: On 22 March 1421 Henry V's progress in his French campaign experienced an unexpected reverse. Henry had left his brother and presumptive heir Thomas, Duke of Clarence in charge while he returned to England. Clarence engaged a Franco-Scottish force of 5000 men, led by Gilbert Motier de La Fayette and John Stewart, Earl of Buchan at the Battle of Baugé. Clarence, against the advice of his lieutenants, before his army had been fully assembled, attacked with a force of no more than 1500 men-at-arms. He then, during the course of the battle, led a charge of a few hundred men into the main body of the Franco-Scottish army, who quickly enveloped the English. In the ensuing melée, the Scot, John Carmichael of Douglasdale, broke his lance unhorsing the Duke of Clarence. Once on the ground, the duke was slain by Alexander Buchanan.[69][71] The body of the Duke of Clarence was recovered from the field by Thomas Montacute, 4th Earl of Salisbury, who conducted the English retreat.[72]

text: English success[edit]

text: Henry V returned to France and went to Paris, then visiting Chartres and Gâtinais before returning to Paris. From there, he decided to attack the Dauphin-held town of Meaux. It turned out to be more difficult to overcome than first thought. The siege began about 6 October 1421, and the town held for seven months before finally falling on 11 May 1422.[69]

text: At the end of May, Henry was joined by his queen and together with the French court, they went to rest at Senlis. While there, it became apparent that he was ill (possibly dysentery), and when he set out to the Upper Loire, he diverted to the royal castle at Vincennes, near Paris, where he died on 31 August 1422.[69] The elderly and insane Charles VI of France died two months later on 21 October 1422. Henry left an only child, his nine-month-old son, Henry, later to become Henry VI.[73]

text: On his deathbed, Henry V had given the Duke of Bedford responsibility for English France (as Henry VI was only an infant). The war in France continued under Bedford's generalship and several battles were won. The English won an emphatic victory at the Battle of Verneuil (17 August 1424). At the Battle of Baugé, Clarence had rushed into battle without the support of his archers. At Verneuil, the archers fought to devastating effect against the Franco-Scottish army. The effect of the battle was to virtually destroy the Dauphin's field army and to eliminate the Scots as a significant military force for the rest of the war.[73][74]

text: French victory: 1429–1453[edit]

text: Joan of Arc and French revival[edit]

text: The appearance of Joan of Arc at the siege of Orléans sparked a revival of French spirit, and the tide began to turn against the English.[73] The English laid siege to Orléans in 1428, but their force was insufficient to fully invest the city. In 1429 Joan convinced the Dauphin to send her to the siege, saying she had received visions from God telling her to drive out the English. She raised the morale of the troops, and they attacked the English redoubts, forcing the English to lift the siege. Inspired by Joan, the French took several English strongholds on the Loire.[75]

text: The English retreated from the Loire Valley, pursued by a French army. Near the village of Patay, French cavalry broke through a unit of English longbowmen that had been sent to block the road, then swept through the retreating English army. The English lost 2,200 men, and the commander, John Talbot, 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, was taken prisoner. This victory opened the way for the Dauphin to march to Reims for his coronation as Charles VII, on 16 July 1429.[75][76]

text: After the coronation, Charles VII's army fared less well. An attempted French siege of Paris was defeated on 8 September 1429, and Charles VII withdrew to the Loire Valley.[77]

text: Henry's coronations and the desertion of Burgundy[edit]

text: Henry VI was crowned king of England at Westminster Abbey on 5 November 1429 and king of France at Notre-Dame, in Paris, on 16 December 1431.[73]

text: Joan of Arc was captured by the Burgundians at the siege of Compiègne on 23 May 1430. The Burgundians transferred her to the English, who organised a trial headed by Pierre Cauchon, Bishop of Beauvais and member of the English Council at Rouen. Joan was convicted and burned at the stake on 30 May 1431.[75] (She was rehabilitated 25 years later by Pope Callixtus III.)

text: After the death of Joan of Arc, the fortunes of war turned dramatically against the English.[78] Most of Henry's royal advisers were against making peace. Among the factions, the Duke of Bedford wanted to defend Normandy, the Duke of Gloucester was committed to just Calais, whereas Cardinal Beaufort was inclined to peace. Negotiations stalled. It seems that at the congress of Arras, in the summer of 1435, where the duke of Beaufort was mediator, the English were unrealistic in their demands. A few days after the congress ended in September, Philip III, duke of Burgundy, deserted to Charles VII, signing the Treaty of Arras that returned Paris to the King of France. This was a major blow to English sovereignty in France.[73] The Duke of Bedford died on 14 September 1435 and was later replaced by Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York.[78]

text: French resurgence[edit]

text: The allegiance of Burgundy remained fickle, but the English focus on expanding their domains in the Low Countries left them little energy to intervene in the rest of France.[79] The long truces that marked the war gave Charles time to centralise the French state and reorganise his army and government, replacing his feudal levies with a more modern professional army that could put its superior numbers to good use. A castle that once could only be captured after a prolonged siege would now fall after a few days from cannon bombardment. The French artillery developed a reputation as the best in the world.[78]

text: By 1449, the French had retaken Rouen. In 1450 the Count of Clermont and Arthur de Richemont, Earl of Richmond, of the Montfort family (the future Arthur III, Duke of Brittany), caught an English army attempting to relieve Caen and defeated it at the Battle of Formigny. Richemont's force attacked the English army from the flank and rear just as they were on the verge of beating Clermont's army.[80]

text: Fall of Gascony[edit]

text: After Charles VII's successful Normandy campaign in 1450, he concentrated his efforts on Gascony, the last province held by the English. Bordeaux, Gascony's capital, was besieged and surrendered to the French on 30 June 1451. Largely due to the English sympathies of the Gascon people, this was reversed when John Talbot and his army retook the city on 23 October 1452. However, the English were decisively defeated at the Battle of Castillon on 17 July 1453. Talbot had been persuaded to engage the French army at Castillon near Bordeaux. During the battle the French appeared to retreat towards their camp. The French camp at Castillon had been laid out by Charles VII's ordnance officer Jean Bureau and this was instrumental in the French success as when the French cannon opened fire, from their positions in the camp, the English took severe casualties losing both Talbot and his son.[81]

text: End of the war[edit]

text: Although the Battle of Castillon is considered the last battle of the Hundred Years' War,[81] England and France remained formally at war for another 20 years, but the English were in no position to carry on the war as they faced unrest at home. Following defeat in the Hundred Years' War, English landowners complained vociferously about the financial losses resulting from the loss of their continental holdings; this is often considered a major cause of the Wars of the Roses, that started in 1455.[78][82]

text:
showvteBurgundian Wars  (1474–77)
Neuss
Héricourt
Planta
Grandson
Morat
Nancy

Guinegate

text: The Hundred Years' War almost resumed in 1474, when the duke Charles of Burgundy, counting on English support, took up arms against Louis XI. Louis managed to isolate the Burgundians by buying Edward IV of England off with a large cash sum and an annual pension, in the Treaty of Picquigny (1475). The treaty formally ended the Hundred Years' War with Edward renouncing his claim to the throne of France. However, future Kings of England (and later of Great Britain) continued to claim the title until 1803, when they were dropped in deference to the exiled Count of Provence, titular King Louis XVIII, who was living in England after the French Revolution.[83]

text: Significance[edit]

text: Historical significance[edit]

text: The French victory marked the end of a long period of instability that had started with the Norman Conquest (1066), when William the Conqueror added "King of England" to his titles, becoming both the vassal to (as Duke of Normandy) and the equal of (as king of England) the king of France.[84]

text: When the war ended, England was bereft of its Continental possessions, leaving it with only Calais on the continent. The war destroyed the English dream of a joint monarchy and led to the rejection in England of all things French, but the French language in England, which had served as the language of the ruling classes and commerce there from the time of the Norman conquest, left many vestiges in English vocabulary. English became the official language in 1362 and French was no longer used for teaching from 1385.[85]

text: National feeling that emerged from the war unified both France and England further. Despite the devastation on its soil, the Hundred Years' War accelerated the process of transforming France from a feudal monarchy to a centralised state.[86] In England the political and financial troubles which emerged from the defeat were a major cause of the War of the Roses (1455–1487).[82]

text: Lowe (1997) argued that opposition to the war helped to shape England's early modern political culture. Although anti-war and pro-peace spokesmen generally failed to influence outcomes at the time, they had a long-term impact. England showed decreasing enthusiasm for conflict deemed not in the national interest, yielding only losses in return for high economic burdens. In comparing this English cost-benefit analysis with French attitudes, given that both countries suffered from weak leaders and undisciplined soldiers, Lowe noted that the French understood that warfare was necessary to expel the foreigners occupying their homeland. Furthermore, French kings found alternative ways to finance the war – sales taxes, debasing the coinage – and were less dependent than the English on tax levies passed by national legislatures. English anti-war critics thus had more to work with than the French.[87]

text: Bubonic plague and warfare reduced population numbers throughout Europe during this period. France lost half its population during the Hundred Years' War.[70] Normandy lost three-quarters of its population, and Paris two-thirds.[88] The population of England was reduced by 20 to 33 percent due to plague in the same period.[89]

text: Military significance[edit]

text: In 1445 the first regular standing army in Western Europe since Roman times was organised in France partly as a solution to marauding free companies. The mercenary companies were given a choice of either joining the Royal army as compagnies d'ordonnance on a permanent basis, or being hunted down and destroyed if they refused. France gained a total standing army of around 6,000 men, which was sent out to gradually eliminate the remaining mercenaries who insisted on operating on their own. The new standing army had a more disciplined and professional approach to warfare than its predecessors.[90]

text: The Hundred Years' War was a time of rapid military evolution. Weapons, tactics, army structure and the social meaning of war all changed, partly in response to the war's costs, partly through advancement in technology and partly through lessons that warfare taught. The feudal system was slowly disintegrating throughout the hundred years war.

text: By the war's end, although the heavy cavalry was still considered the most powerful unit in an army, the heavily armored horse had to deal with several tactics developed to deny or mitigate its effective use on a battlefield.[91] The English began using lightly armoured mounted troops, known as hobelars. Hobelars tactics had been developed against the Scots, in the Anglo-Scottish wars of the 14th century. Hobelars rode smaller unarmoured horses, enabling them to move through difficult or boggy terrain where heavier cavalry would struggle. Rather than fight while seated on the horse, they would dismount to engage the enemy.[90][92][93]

text: Timeline[edit]

text: Battles[edit]

text: Important figures[edit]

text: France[edit]

text:
Arms
Historical Figure
Life
Notes

King Philip VI

1293–1350, reigned 1328–1350

Charles of Valois' son

King John II

1319–1364, reigned 1350–1364

Philip VI's son

King Charles V

1338–1380, reigned 1364–1380

John II's son

Bertrand du Guesclin

1320–1380

Commander

Louis I, Duke of Anjou

1339–1384, regent 1380–1382

John II's son

King Charles VI

1368–1422, reigned 1380–1422

Charles V's son

King Charles VII

1403–1461, reigned 1422–1461

Charles VI's son

Joan of Arc

1412–1431

Religious visionary

La Hire

1390–1443

Commander

Jean Poton de Xaintrailles

1390–1461

Commander

Jean II, Duke of Alençon

1409–1476

Commander

Jean de Dunois

1402–1468

Commander

Jean Bureau

1390–1463

Master Gunner

Gilles de Rais

1405–1440

Commander

text: England[edit]

text:
Arms
Historical Figure
Life
Notes

Isabella of France

1295–1358

Queen consort of England, wife of Edward II, mother of Edward III, regent of England, sister of Charles IV and daughter of Philip IV of France

King Edward III

1312–1377, reigned 1327–1377

Philip IV's grandson

Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster

1310–1361

Commander

Edward, the Black Prince

1330–1376

Edward III's son

John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster

1340–1399

Edward III's son

King Richard II

1367–1400, reigned 1377–1399

Son of the Black Prince, Edward III's grandson

King Henry IV

1367–1413, reigned 1399–1413

John of Gaunt's son, Edward III's grandson

King Henry V

1387–1422, reigned 1413–1422

Henry IV's son

Catherine of Valois

1401–1437

Queen consort of England, daughter of Charles VI of France, mother of Henry VI of England and by her second marriage grandmother of Henry VII

John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford

1389–1435, regent 1422–1435

Henry IV's son

Sir John Fastolf[76]

1380–1459

Commander

John Talbot, 1st Earl of Shrewsbury

1387–1453

Commander

King Henry VI

1421–1471, reigned 1422–1461 (also 1422–1453 as king Henry II of France)

Henry V's son, grandson of Charles VI of France

Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York

1411–1460

Commander

text: Burgundy[edit]

text:
Arms
Historical Figure
Life
Notes

Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy

1342–1404, duke 1363–1404

Son of John II of France

John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy

1371–1419, duke 1404–1419

Son of Philip the Bold

Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy

1396–1467, duke 1419–1467

Son of John the Fearless


document_title: Coleman fuel

question_text: what kind of fuel does a coleman stove use

text: Coleman fuel

text:
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (July 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

(Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Coleman fuel is a petroleum naphtha product marketed by The Coleman Company. Historically called white gas (not white spirit), it is a liquid petroleum fuel (100% light hydrotreated distillate) usually sold in one gallon cans.[1] It is used primarily for fueling lanterns and camp stoves. Additionally, it is a popular fuel for fire dancing. Originally, it was simply casing-head gas or drip gas which has similar properties. Drip gas was sold commercially at gas stations and hardware stores in North America until the early 1950s. The white gas sold today is a similar product but is produced at refineries with the benzene removed.[citation needed]

text: Coleman fuel is a mixture of cyclohexane, nonane, octane, heptane, and pentane.[2]

text: Though Coleman fuel has an octane rating of 50 to 55 and a flammability similar to gasoline, it has none of the additives found in modern gasoline and should not be used as a substitute for gasoline.[citation needed] While it will function as a fuel for gasoline engines, its high combustion temperature and lack of octane boosting additives could damage engine valves[citation needed], while its low octane rating and lack of anti-knock agents can produce knocking that could lead to bearing and piston rod damage, so such use should only be considered for emergencies and/or very short distances. And like gasoline, it should not be used as a substitute for kerosene or diesel fuel. However, it is quite popular as a fuel for model engines, where the low octane rating is not a problem, additives are unwanted, and the clean burning, low odor and longer shelf life are considered advantages.