Battle of Sluys 1340: The Naval Clash That Opened the Hundred Years’ War
- Davit Grigoryan
- Aug 22
- 11 min read
Updated: Sep 2
Picture the dawn of June 24, 1340, off the coast of Flanders. On the horizon, where the sea melts into the sky, hundreds of dark shapes slowly emerge—not a mirage, but the menacing outlines of the French fleet gathered in the harbor of Sluys. The air, moments ago filled only with the cries of gulls and the murmur of waves, suddenly erupts with a chilling roar. The hiss of thousands of arrows tearing through sails, the heart-wrenching screams, the splintering of masts and hulls—this was not just another medieval naval clash. The Battle of Sluys in 1340 marked the beginning of a bloody prelude to the long conflict that would come to be known as the Hundred Years’ War.
This battle became a pivotal moment for the young King of England, Edward III. His ambitious plans to press his claim to the French throne hung by a thread, and the key to them lay in controlling the English Channel. Victory here meant far more than a mere military success—it opened the way to ferry troops onto the continent, threaten the very heart of France, and dictate the course of future campaigns.
The first naval battle of the Hundred Years’ War turned into a resounding triumph for the English. Edward III, personally commanding his fleet, not only crushed his enemy but also secured dominance over the sea routes to his realm for years to come, setting the tone for the opening phase of the long and bloody conflict. The outcome of that day would decide who held the strategic initiative in a war that was only beginning—and Edward seized it without question.
Historical Background: Why Sluys Mattered
To grasp the full intensity of that fateful June day in 1340 off the coast of Flanders, we must go back several years. The roots of the Battle of Sluys lay deep within a tangled web of dynastic ambition and national pride that ignited the Hundred Years’ War.
The formal start of the conflict is usually marked as 1337, when the young and ambitious King of England, Edward III—drawing on the rights of his mother Isabella, daughter of Philip IV the Fair—publicly laid claim to the French throne, left vacant after the death of the last direct Capetian heir. For Philip VI of Valois, firmly seated on the throne, this was more than an insult—it was a direct challenge that demanded a decisive response.
France wasted no time in striking back. In the early years of the conflict, the French fleet—reinforced by seasoned Genoese mercenaries whose galleys were a formidable force—seized the initiative at sea. A wave of devastating raids along the English coast became a nightmare for coastal towns and a serious blow to the crown’s prestige.
In 1338, French forces sacked Southampton, and in the bloody Battle of Arnemuiden, they destroyed a small English convoy carrying the royal treasury, overwhelming it with vastly superior numbers despite the defenders’ heroic resistance—laying bare England’s vulnerability at sea. These raids did more than spread fear and destruction; they severed the vital trade routes that brought wool from Flanders to England—the very foundation of its economy, and therefore, its war funding.
This is where Sluys enters the stage. This small harbor, located at the mouth of the River Zwin near the wealthy and strategically vital city of Bruges, was far more than just a port—it was a natural fortress at sea. Its deep-water anchorage, shielded from the open sea by sandbanks and a narrow entrance, made it an ideal place to assemble and shelter a massive fleet.
For Philip VI, Sluys became a key base for maintaining the naval blockade of England and preparing for a possible invasion of the island. By holding Sluys, France could strangle England’s trade with the continent, threaten its southern coast, and move troops into Flanders with ease.
For Edward III, the situation had become unbearable. French ships roamed the Channel as if it were their own home. His attempts to transport an army to the continent in 1339 were thwarted precisely because of the naval threat. Intelligence reports showed that the amassed fleet at Sluys was a colossal force—over 200 vessels strong.
This gathering was more than just a fleet; it was a Damoclean sword hanging over his entire military strategy. As long as the French controlled Sluys and their galleys could raid with impunity, any major campaign Edward launched in France was doomed to fail. Destroying this armada in its lair was not merely a military necessity—it was a matter of survival for his claims and the very security of England.
Sluys transformed from a mere point on the map into a symbol of French naval power that Edward was determined to shatter at any cost. And in the summer of 1340, he sailed to meet his destiny.
Forces & Commanders: Who Faced Off
When the two giants clashed at the mouth of the Zwin, the scene was impressive but deeply unbalanced. French King Philip VI, fully aware of Sluys’s critical importance, assembled a truly colossal armada. Sources estimate the fleet at between 190 and 213 ships, including a formidable contingent of Genoese mercenary galleys under the command of the experienced Admiral Barbavera.
These low, long vessels, with rows of oars, were the terror of the Mediterranean—able to maneuver even in calm waters and armed with powerful rams. The fleet’s core consisted of heavy, cumbersome cogs—merchant ships hastily requisitioned and converted into floating fortresses.
Two men commanded this motley force: Admiral Hugues Quiéret, a brave knight but an inexperienced sailor, and Nicolas Béhuchet, the king’s former treasurer and a pedantic administrator whose cruelty—he became infamous for executing English prisoners—did little to make up for his lack of naval leadership skills. Their conflicting personalities and lack of unified command would prove to be a fatal flaw.
Edward III awaited them. The young English king, burning with a desire for revenge after the raids and humiliation at Arnemuiden, personally led his expedition. His fleet was considerably smaller—estimates range from 120 to 150 ships, mostly cogs.
These high-sided, single-masted sailing vessels, accustomed to the stormy waters of the North Sea, were like floating castles. Their primary weapon was not rams but men. On board each cog were squads of experienced English and Welsh archers, whose famous longbows delivered devastating range and rapid fire, alongside units of knights and men-at-arms clad in armor, ready for brutal boarding fights.
Although Edward was no sea wolf, he possessed the strategic vision and determination that his opponents lacked. He knew how to inspire his men and placed his trust in captains who knew their ships and the Channel well.
Confident in their numerical superiority and the protection of the harbor, the French took up a static defensive position. According to chroniclers, their ships were arranged in three powerful lines and even chained together at the entrance to the Zwin anchorage. This tactic, resembling infantry formations on land, was meant to create an impenetrable wall of wood and iron. Barbavera’s galleys took the flanks.
The plan was simple: force the English to storm a fixed fortress where the French’s numerical advantage and the high sides of the cogs would give them the decisive edge in close combat. However, this “fortress” robbed them of mobility, turning them into easy targets.
Edward, however, placed his bet on the mobility of his cogs and the devastating power of the longbows. His plan was bold: using the wind and tide, break into the harbor while avoiding a frontal clash with the strongest parts of the French first line, then unleash a hail of arrows on the helpless, immobilized ships before sending in boarding parties.
Now, the outcome of the battle depended not only on the number of ships but also on the skill of their captains, the discipline of the archers, the courage of the knights—and most importantly, the decisions made on the captain’s bridges amid the chaos of battle. The French had the ships, but the English had a clear plan and deadly weapons capable of tipping the scales against numerical superiority.
The battlefield was set, commanders took their places, and the clock struck noon.
The Battle of Sluys Unfolds: Maneuvers & Turning Point
Noon on June 24, 1340. The sun stood high over the mouth of the Zwin, illuminating a terrifying panorama: three tightly packed lines of French ships, chained together, had transformed the harbor of Sluys into a massive immobile barricade. Above this forest of masts flew the banners of Philip VI.
Admirals Quiéret and Béhuchet, watching the approach of the much smaller English fleet, likely felt confident. Their plan for a frontal assault and victory in close combat seemed foolproof. But Edward III was not about to play by their rules. His genius in naval tactics was about to be fully revealed.
The key to success was the wind and the tide. The English cogs—tall and nimble under sail—took up a favorable position. Edward waited for the following wind and the rising tide to give his ships the momentum to surge along the French lines, rather than crashing headlong into their center.
When the moment came, signal flags flew from the royal ship. The English fleet, like a pack of furious sea predators, lunged forward, using the elements as their ally. They did not ram the first line. Instead, the cogs skillfully weaved between the French squadrons, flanking them and striking at their sides—where the hulls of the enemy cogs were most vulnerable.
And then something unprecedented began. From the high decks of the cogs, a truly deadly storm descended. English and Welsh archers, disciplined and cold-blooded, unleashed volley after volley of arrows at a monstrous speed. Chronicles compare their fire to a "winter hail," so dense was the barrage.
The longbows dominated the range, against which the Genoese crossbows—hindered further by their infantry cramped on the narrow decks—were far less effective. Arrows tore through sails, embedded themselves in the wooden hulls, but most importantly, they mowed down men.
The decks of the French ships, packed tightly with soldiers awaiting boarding, turned into a bloody slaughterhouse. Knights in heavy armor were helpless against this whistling hell from above. Panic, screams of the wounded, and chaos reigned on the French vessels.
Only now, with the enemy demoralized and weakened, did the second phase of the English plan come into play. Under the cover of continuous arrow fire, the cogs closed in tightly on their targeted French cogs. Gangways and boarding hooks flew onto enemy decks.
With thunderous cries of "Saint George!" and "Edward!", English knights and men-at-arms clad in steel surged forward. A fierce, merciless slaughter began. The French, already suffering heavy losses from the arrows and trapped on their chained ships, could neither retreat nor receive reinforcements.
The battle fragmented into dozens of isolated skirmishes on the decks of individual vessels, where English discipline and fighting spirit prevailed. The Genoese galleys, which had retained their maneuverability, chose to flee the disaster by breaking free from the trap. But their escape only underscored the scale of the defeat suffered by the main French force.
By evening, it was clear: Edward’s tactical genius and the devastating power of the longbow in naval combat had turned the tide of battle. The French “fortress” had become their mass grave. The outcome of the day was decided.
Outcome & Consequences: Channel Supremacy—and Limits
When the sun rose on June 25, 1340, revealing the battlefield, the scene was nothing short of apocalyptic. The harbor of Sluys had become a monstrous graveyard of ships. The water, stained a deep crimson, teemed with wreckage, bodies of the dead, and desperate survivors clinging to life.
French losses were catastrophic—almost unimaginable for a medieval battle. Sources agree on estimates: between 16,000 and 20,000 men perished—sailors, soldiers, and mercenaries alike. Nearly the entire fleet of Philip VI was destroyed; about 190 ships either sank or were captured as English prizes.
Among the dead were both French commanders: Hugues Quiéret fell in combat, while Nicolas Béhuchet, taken prisoner, was hanged on the mast of his flagship by Edward III’s order—a brutal revenge for his previous atrocities.
English casualties, by contrast, were surprisingly light—chroniclers mention only a few hundred, perhaps around a thousand men. This was not just a defeat; it was the destruction of France’s naval power.
The immediate consequences of the victory were both clear and monumental. Edward III had achieved the most important goal: control of the English Channel passed into English hands. The route for transferring troops to the continent was now open.
Just weeks after the triumph at Sluys, the English army landed unopposed in Flanders and laid siege to the key city of Tournai. It seemed like the decisive blow to the heart of France was at hand!
However, the first limits of naval dominance soon became apparent. The siege of Tournai dragged on, Edward’s allies proved unreliable, and Philip VI avoided a decisive battle on land, wearing down his opponent. The campaign ended with a humiliating truce at Esplechin in September 1340. Victory at sea did not bring an immediate victory on land.
Nevertheless, the strategic importance of Sluys for the Hundred Years’ War is hard to overstate. For decades to come, England established an effective monopoly over the sea lanes of the Channel. This control ensured:
Coastal security: French raids, which had been frequent before 1340, sharply declined in scale and frequency.
Trade stability: English merchants could conduct business relatively peacefully with Flanders and Gascony, replenishing the royal treasury.
Strategic initiative: England gained the ability to choose the time and place for invasions. This freedom of action enabled Edward III, six years later, to land in Normandy and deliver a crushing defeat to the French at the Battle of Crécy (1346), followed by the capture of Calais (1347)—a key port that remained an English stronghold for over two centuries.
However, there was no room for illusions. Although the French suffered catastrophic losses at sea, they quickly began to rebuild their strength. Small-scale raids and privateering continued to plague the English.
Sluys secured dominance in the Channel but did not guarantee victory in the war. It was a Pyrrhic victory in the sense that it opened the way to even larger and bloodier land campaigns, the outcomes of which were far from certain. England had gained a powerful tool, but wielding it wisely would require great effort and enormous cost.
Dominance over the waves did not mean dominance over the fields of France.
Legacy & Historical Significance
The Battle of Sluys in 1340 did not merely remain a bloody chapter in medieval textbooks. It became a point of no return, fundamentally changing the course of the Hundred Years’ War and forever etching its name in the annals of naval history.
For England, it was the first great national-scale naval victory—a triumph that instantly gained symbolic status. It proved that the island kingdom was capable not only of defending its shores but also of delivering crushing blows to the very heart of its continental enemy’s sea power.
Edward III returned to London a hero, and Sluys became a legend, fueling the English fighting spirit for decades to come.
The strategic lessons of the battle proved deep and enduring. It became a vivid textbook example of using the longbow in naval combat.
The success of the English archers at Sluys was no accident; it confirmed their decisive role not only in land battles (as later brilliantly demonstrated at Crécy and Poitiers) but also at sea. The French and their allies were forced to admit that a dense, high-speed barrage from a distance beyond the reach of crossbows could devastate a ship’s deck and break the will to resist even before boarding began.
This experience forced a reevaluation of fleet tactics and armament, emphasizing the importance of firepower and maneuver over direct hand-to-hand combat.
Managing such a colossal armada and the need for a fair division of the enormous spoils—captured ships and cargoes—after the victory raised complex questions about naval administration. Some historians see this as one of the factors leading to more formalized fleet management.
Although there is no direct evidence, it is reasonable to assume that the scale of Sluys and the challenges that followed contributed to the development of maritime law and administration. This may have indirectly influenced the processes that, decades later, led to a clearer definition of the functions of the High Court of Admiralty in England—established specifically to handle such complex maritime matters, from prize law to discipline.
Yet the deepest legacy of Sluys lies in the realm of geopolitics. The battle firmly marked the English Channel as the "English highway" for decades to come. It set a precedent, proving that control over the Channel was not merely a convenience but a vital necessity for England in its struggle against a larger continental power.
This doctrine of naval dominance became a cornerstone of English—and later British—strategy for centuries. Sluys demonstrated that even in an era when wars were primarily decided on land, a fleet could be the decisive factor, opening or closing the doors for invasions, securing resources, and undermining the enemy’s will.
It remains forever etched in memory as the bloody dawn of a long conflict, the first resounding chord in the symphony of the Hundred Years’ War, a reminder that sometimes a single battle can change the course of history—opening the way to future victories, and to new abysses of suffering.
Comments