The fifth lecture in the Glasgow and West of Scotland Branch

"Agincourt "- talk by Professor Anne Curry  

Context: the Armagnac-Burgundian civil war which weakened the French war effort and gave advantage to the English.  An English victory is not in dispute, but what sort of victory was it?

Primarily -‘did the French lose Agincourt or did the English win Agincourt'?  The talk focussed on the historical narrative and battle plans.  

Professor Curry's talk broke through the myths by exploring the realities with her recent research in documentary evidence.    English campaign plans were delayed by the financing of indentures, the attempt on Henry V's life and the garrisoning of Honfleur.  On October 5^th Henry V went on into France, but the Dauphin came to Rouen.  Henry V marched north towards Calais, where French armies began to gather.   The French planned to fight on Agincourt's sloping terrain.   The French may have thought it was easier to fight Henry V and then take Calais.

The defensive skill of Henry V on the march was shown: in the chronicles in the accounts of the Somme crossing and the picture of the archer preparing stakes; in planning to fight behind muddy land at the foot of Agincourt's wooded slope. ( Illustrated from photographs)     

The French battle order was not made up of as large an army as might have been fielded, due to the non arrival of soldiers.   In the battle, the French nobles advanced down between woods, with crossbowmen mainly to the rear.

The English battle order as explained from references to the indenture of Sir Thomas Erpingham was made up of a ratio of one man at arms to three archers.   In an old picture of the battle, the English fought defensively in three lines, like a fork, so the archers could fire forwards, sideways and from the woods.

The talk dismissed the myth of an easy win for the English at Agincourt.  The questions brought out the relevance of further research to find the truth.

Q1.   What about the cost of accounting?   Did the English government have a better accounting base than the French government?    

Q2.    How far does the archaeology of the battle extend to other sites?

Q3.    Why were the French so keen to beat the English, when Henry V's army was  giving the appearance of heading for Calais?  

Q4.    What has battlefield archaeology established about the site of the battle?

Q5.    Is the military strategy/ structure of the battle of interest?

Q6.    How long did the battle last/

Q7.    What do French records show about arms?

Q8.    Is the date of the battle late autumn?

Q9.    If Agincourt was not really a victory, was its effect propaganda?

  

Attendance 35