Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Juliet Barker notes on page 115 of Agincourt that all of the ninety archers Lord Scrope was required to bring to the wars had to be mounted. These mounted troops were used for scouting, foraging, and raiding, but Henry had no real intention of deploying them mounted in a full-scale battle with the main French army.
THAT SAID: the battle of Agincourt IS quite significant as the English were the first country in western europe to give serious military responsibility to commoners by putting longbows into their hands and demanding they train themselves in their use. 5.
Agincourt was a decisive military victory by a beleaguered and numerically inferior English force against a more powerful French army. It was a crushing defeat for the French, who may have lost up to 10,000 dead (in comparison to about 100 English killed). It was, perhaps more than anything, a huge propaganda victory for Henry V, who came home ...
I think the Battle of Steel between Mace Tyrell and JonCon and Aegon is based of the battle of Agincourt, with the Golden Company as England and the Tyrells as France. -In JonCon II, he spends a whole paragraph talking about all the different bows the Golden Company has, bows were important at Agincourt. -The TWOW Arianne chapters talk a few ...
The meat of the post is going to be on the second half of the video, where Historia Civilis gets a lot wrong about the impact the Battle of Agincourt had on medieval warfare. 0:30-0:35. King Henry the Fifth of England had invaded with a small army and some unrealistic goals Henry V's army was a massive one by the standards of the time.
On the field of Agincourt itself, a group of French knights swore to take down Henry V of England personally (they all died). Off the battlefield, the politics of the war were heavily shaped by a pair of very famous and high profile assassinations, the 1407 murder of Louis, Duke of Orleans on the orders of John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy ...
The Battle of Agincourt: Sources and Interpretations, by Anne Curry Agincourt: A New History, by Anne Curry Agincourt: The King, the Campaign, the Battle, by Juliet Barker "The Battle Of Agincourt" by Clifford J. Rogers, in The Hundred Years War (Part II): Different Vistas, ed. Andrew Villalon and Donald Kagay, p35–132 (3/3)
The meat of the post is going to be on the second half of the video, where Historia Civilis gets a lot wrong about the impact the Battle of Agincourt had on medieval warfare. 0:30-0:35. King Henry the Fifth of England had invaded with a small army and some unrealistic goals. Henry V's army was a massive one by the standards of the time.
For the meantime, OP, that particular episode of Agincourt has come up before, and thus, we can look to u/MI13's posts: On the pragmatics of taking prisoners in the Medieval Period; More on practical matters of prisoner-taking, also touching a little on Agincourt; A specific look at the execution itself;
mcjc1997 • 5 yr. ago. Mud won agincourt not longbowmen. Finalpotato • 5 yr. ago. Having a ranged weapon able to take out people on plate armour helps. 6. mcjc1997 • 5 yr. ago. It’s been scientifically proven that longbows aren’t effective against penetrate plate armor. 4. epifanio6 • 5 yr. ago.