What do you think?
Rate this book
Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle that Made England
From a master historian comes an astonishing chronicle of life in medieval Europe and the battle that altered the course of an empire.
Although almost six centuries old, the Battle of Agincourt still captivates the imaginations of men and women on both sides of the Atlantic.
It has been immortalized in high culture (Shakespeare's Henry V ) and low (the New York Post prints Henry's battle cry on its editorial page each Memorial Day). It is the classic underdog story in the history of warfare, and generations have wondered how the English -- outnumbered by the French six to one -- could have succeeded so bravely and brilliantly.
Drawing upon a wide range of sources, eminent scholar Juliet Barker casts aside the legend and shows us that the truth behind Agincourt is just as exciting, just as fascinating, and far more significant. She paints a gripping narrative of the October 1415 clash between outnumbered English archers and heavily armored French knights. But she also takes us beyond the battlefield into palaces and common cottages to bring into vivid focus an entire medieval world in flux. Populated with chivalrous heroes, dastardly spies, and a ferocious and bold king, Agincourt is as earthshaking as its subject -- and confirms Juliet Barker's status as both a historian and a storyteller of the first rank.
Although almost six centuries old, the Battle of Agincourt still captivates the imaginations of men and women on both sides of the Atlantic.
It has been immortalized in high culture (Shakespeare's Henry V ) and low (the New York Post prints Henry's battle cry on its editorial page each Memorial Day). It is the classic underdog story in the history of warfare, and generations have wondered how the English -- outnumbered by the French six to one -- could have succeeded so bravely and brilliantly.
Drawing upon a wide range of sources, eminent scholar Juliet Barker casts aside the legend and shows us that the truth behind Agincourt is just as exciting, just as fascinating, and far more significant. She paints a gripping narrative of the October 1415 clash between outnumbered English archers and heavily armored French knights. But she also takes us beyond the battlefield into palaces and common cottages to bring into vivid focus an entire medieval world in flux. Populated with chivalrous heroes, dastardly spies, and a ferocious and bold king, Agincourt is as earthshaking as its subject -- and confirms Juliet Barker's status as both a historian and a storyteller of the first rank.
445 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2005
About the author
Juliet Barker
43 books135 followersJuliet R. V. Barker (born 1958) is a British historian, specialising in the Middle Ages and literary biography. She is the author of a number of well-regarded works on the Brontës, William Wordsworth, and medieval tournaments. From 1983 to 1989 she was the curator and librarian of the Brontë Parsonage Museum.
Barker was educated at Bradford Girls' Grammar School and St Anne's College, Oxford, where she gained her doctorate in medieval history. In 1999 she was awarded an honorary Doctorate of Letters by the University of Bradford. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature.
Barker was educated at Bradford Girls' Grammar School and St Anne's College, Oxford, where she gained her doctorate in medieval history. In 1999 she was awarded an honorary Doctorate of Letters by the University of Bradford. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews
January 18, 2017
I've given this very thorough, breathtaking book about the Battle of Agincourt 5 stars.
I absolutely couldn't put this one down. Juliet Barker covers all the events leading up to the battle, the battle itself and the aftermath so anything you want to know about Agincourt is probably included in this book.
The author explains how Henry V raised the funds for his first campaign in France in great detail for anyone interested in Medieval finances. She has meticulously scoured all the financial details if that particular subject interests you. Even if you decide to skim over some of this information you'll still get a good idea how wars were financed in that era.
Barker researched many medieval records and documents and was able to glean from then a lot of things about the King's personal and private life.
For example, the author brought to life the personal relationship between Henry V and his 1 year younger brother Thomas, Duke of Clarence.
The author shows that there was clearly antipathy between these two.. Thomas was their father's favorite and was the alpha male, jock type that loved warfare. He had an outgoing personality and seemed to be the life of the party as well as rash and reckless.
Apparently the Duke of Clarence and his father King Henry IV looked down upon older brother Henry's intellectual pursuits with disdain with his father opining that Henry was only priest material.
Prince Henry was a seasoned warrior that helped his father defeat the Percy clan's uprising at the Battle of Shrewsbury. When it seemed that the King was going to lose the battle Henry V made a flank movement that destroyed Percy and his army - all at the age of 16.
Then the very busy Henry IV entrusted Prince Henry to put down the Welsh uprising even though his son was still in his teens. Once again Prince Henry was able to put down the uprising and was very popular with his men. So as to why the Prince could never please his father is difficult to understand unless the invalid King resented and was jealous of his brilliant son.
So apparently Henry V intellectual pursuits did not hinder him from being a great warrior.
But still the King remained ever critical of Henry while his son Thomas was his pet.
I could almost imagine the sibling rivalry between the rough and tumble Thomas who no doubt felt he would make the better King than his more disciplined and well rounded older brother.
Towards the end of King Henry IV reign his mysterious, medical malady was taking its toll on the King. Prince Henry was the de facto king at this point and lead the government council.
The Prince became the victim of spurious rumors and power struggles with his father taking him off his council and replacing him with his brother Thomas. It does seem that Henry was to be demoted and no longer his father's heir.
The King's council were divided over which faction to back in the French civil war after the assassination of Duke Louis d'Orleans the French king's only brother by the rapacious Duke of Burgundy, his Uncle. The French King had periodic bouts of insanity so Duke Louis ran the government while helping himself to the French treasury.
The Duke of Burgundy was out of power and detested Duke Louis. The cowardly Burgundy had Louis assassinated in the streets of Paris during the dead of night and the French civil war began between the Burgundians and the Armagnac faction.
Duke Louis's heir, Charles was about 16 years old when he came to power and he not only sought justice but revenge against Burgundy. Unfortunately Charles was on his own since the insane king was not able to bring Burgundy to justice.
So began the second half of the Hundred Years War as the Duke of Burgundy was determined to systematically destroy the late Duke's family.
As a side note; when the English Army had besieged the town of Orleans and were well on their way to conquering France, it seemed likely the Duke of Orleans would lose everything to Burgundy and England, with all hope lost. Miraculously a shepherd girl Joan of Arc, from Domremy, France felt called by God to raise the siege of Orleans.
At this point they didn't have anything to lose so she was well welcomed into the besieged town with the French army behind her which soundly lifted the siege and defeated the English.
Orleans would be saved while Duke Charles was still a prisoner of war in England as he had been for 25 years after being captured at the Battle of Agincourt.
Prince Henry wanted to weaken France by siding with Burgundy; which would make his goal of recovering his stolen lands in France one step closer.
Prince Thomas couldn't wait to go to war - wanting to back the King of France's faction the Armagnacs. The indulgent KIng sent Thomas to France to help the Armagnac cause while Prince Henry was kicked off the council and was once again in disfavor with his father.
While Thomas was in France, King Henry IV died so he was recalled by his new King Henry V. Any plans that Thomas had of taking the crown from his brother were forever dashed and he was given little voice in the new government.
Another hint that Henry V detested his brother Thomas became clearer after the King made his will upon embarking for war with France. He mentions his brother, John, Duke of Bedford as his 'most favorite brother' and his younger brother Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester as his beloved brother.
No mention of Thomas, Duke of Clarence.
Henry the Vth's superior intellect was much needed when it became time to raise troops and money for his desired war with France. Most English kings had outsourced this task to several different and high ranking nobleman but King Henry did everything himself, and did an excellent job to boot.
As the author detailed all the planning necessary to wage war I had to marvel at the young King's abilities.
Henry V was a very complex man with many abilities and skills. Not only was he a ruthless warrior, he was also a pious Christian and an extremely intelligent man.
All of these qualities combined made him one of England's best loved Kings; and his amazing victory at Agincourt while outnumbered 5 to 1 is considered one of the greatest victories of all time.
Henry V would give all the glory to God.
In this book Juliet Barker follows King Henry from the beginning to the end with his famous victory at Agincourt. I found this book as thrilling as any fictional action/adventure novel as the author brought the Medieval king and his era to life.
I absolutely couldn't put this one down. Juliet Barker covers all the events leading up to the battle, the battle itself and the aftermath so anything you want to know about Agincourt is probably included in this book.
The author explains how Henry V raised the funds for his first campaign in France in great detail for anyone interested in Medieval finances. She has meticulously scoured all the financial details if that particular subject interests you. Even if you decide to skim over some of this information you'll still get a good idea how wars were financed in that era.
Barker researched many medieval records and documents and was able to glean from then a lot of things about the King's personal and private life.
For example, the author brought to life the personal relationship between Henry V and his 1 year younger brother Thomas, Duke of Clarence.
The author shows that there was clearly antipathy between these two.. Thomas was their father's favorite and was the alpha male, jock type that loved warfare. He had an outgoing personality and seemed to be the life of the party as well as rash and reckless.
Apparently the Duke of Clarence and his father King Henry IV looked down upon older brother Henry's intellectual pursuits with disdain with his father opining that Henry was only priest material.
Prince Henry was a seasoned warrior that helped his father defeat the Percy clan's uprising at the Battle of Shrewsbury. When it seemed that the King was going to lose the battle Henry V made a flank movement that destroyed Percy and his army - all at the age of 16.
Then the very busy Henry IV entrusted Prince Henry to put down the Welsh uprising even though his son was still in his teens. Once again Prince Henry was able to put down the uprising and was very popular with his men. So as to why the Prince could never please his father is difficult to understand unless the invalid King resented and was jealous of his brilliant son.
So apparently Henry V intellectual pursuits did not hinder him from being a great warrior.
But still the King remained ever critical of Henry while his son Thomas was his pet.
I could almost imagine the sibling rivalry between the rough and tumble Thomas who no doubt felt he would make the better King than his more disciplined and well rounded older brother.
Towards the end of King Henry IV reign his mysterious, medical malady was taking its toll on the King. Prince Henry was the de facto king at this point and lead the government council.
The Prince became the victim of spurious rumors and power struggles with his father taking him off his council and replacing him with his brother Thomas. It does seem that Henry was to be demoted and no longer his father's heir.
The King's council were divided over which faction to back in the French civil war after the assassination of Duke Louis d'Orleans the French king's only brother by the rapacious Duke of Burgundy, his Uncle. The French King had periodic bouts of insanity so Duke Louis ran the government while helping himself to the French treasury.
The Duke of Burgundy was out of power and detested Duke Louis. The cowardly Burgundy had Louis assassinated in the streets of Paris during the dead of night and the French civil war began between the Burgundians and the Armagnac faction.
Duke Louis's heir, Charles was about 16 years old when he came to power and he not only sought justice but revenge against Burgundy. Unfortunately Charles was on his own since the insane king was not able to bring Burgundy to justice.
So began the second half of the Hundred Years War as the Duke of Burgundy was determined to systematically destroy the late Duke's family.
As a side note; when the English Army had besieged the town of Orleans and were well on their way to conquering France, it seemed likely the Duke of Orleans would lose everything to Burgundy and England, with all hope lost. Miraculously a shepherd girl Joan of Arc, from Domremy, France felt called by God to raise the siege of Orleans.
At this point they didn't have anything to lose so she was well welcomed into the besieged town with the French army behind her which soundly lifted the siege and defeated the English.
Orleans would be saved while Duke Charles was still a prisoner of war in England as he had been for 25 years after being captured at the Battle of Agincourt.
Prince Henry wanted to weaken France by siding with Burgundy; which would make his goal of recovering his stolen lands in France one step closer.
Prince Thomas couldn't wait to go to war - wanting to back the King of France's faction the Armagnacs. The indulgent KIng sent Thomas to France to help the Armagnac cause while Prince Henry was kicked off the council and was once again in disfavor with his father.
While Thomas was in France, King Henry IV died so he was recalled by his new King Henry V. Any plans that Thomas had of taking the crown from his brother were forever dashed and he was given little voice in the new government.
Another hint that Henry V detested his brother Thomas became clearer after the King made his will upon embarking for war with France. He mentions his brother, John, Duke of Bedford as his 'most favorite brother' and his younger brother Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester as his beloved brother.
No mention of Thomas, Duke of Clarence.
Henry the Vth's superior intellect was much needed when it became time to raise troops and money for his desired war with France. Most English kings had outsourced this task to several different and high ranking nobleman but King Henry did everything himself, and did an excellent job to boot.
As the author detailed all the planning necessary to wage war I had to marvel at the young King's abilities.
Henry V was a very complex man with many abilities and skills. Not only was he a ruthless warrior, he was also a pious Christian and an extremely intelligent man.
All of these qualities combined made him one of England's best loved Kings; and his amazing victory at Agincourt while outnumbered 5 to 1 is considered one of the greatest victories of all time.
Henry V would give all the glory to God.
In this book Juliet Barker follows King Henry from the beginning to the end with his famous victory at Agincourt. I found this book as thrilling as any fictional action/adventure novel as the author brought the Medieval king and his era to life.
Read
February 3, 2019Going to war against France, whose king periodically believed himself to have been made of glass, may not have been exactly sporting but does show something of the character of Henry V of England who as Barker tells us in this book had been shot in the face by an arrow at the battle of Shrewsbury, the wound was packed out much as large wounds are today until it healed.
Barker's approach is to delight in the detail available to us from the Royal accounts. We see the amounts of supplies and who they came from such as the woman blacksmith involved in producing armaments, and also every man signed up for the campaign - at least in terms of numbers, because this was an army raised on contracts with leading figures undertaking to serve for a fixed period of time with a certain number of combatants of a certain type such as armoured men at arms or archers.
As an accessible study of a single campaign this book is a fantastic achievement, it is not however going to give you a view of the larger issues of the Hundred Years war between England and France. Barker does continue her narrative from the aftermath of the battle down to the more or less final defeat of the English in the 1450s in Conquest.
Barker's approach is to delight in the detail available to us from the Royal accounts. We see the amounts of supplies and who they came from such as the woman blacksmith involved in producing armaments, and also every man signed up for the campaign - at least in terms of numbers, because this was an army raised on contracts with leading figures undertaking to serve for a fixed period of time with a certain number of combatants of a certain type such as armoured men at arms or archers.
As an accessible study of a single campaign this book is a fantastic achievement, it is not however going to give you a view of the larger issues of the Hundred Years war between England and France. Barker does continue her narrative from the aftermath of the battle down to the more or less final defeat of the English in the 1450s in Conquest.
March 20, 2013
History tells you what happened. Good history tells you why. Great history puts you in that world and makes you feel it, makes you start to understand it. This is great history.
Agincourt was too foreign a battle for me to understand. I had thought it was a rather pointless battle; a great English victory, certainly, but fought for no good reason in a cause that was ultimately futile. Barker's book changed all that. It explained why, in the foreign culture that was England of 1415, the campaign was necessary and logical. It explained why, as the title states, the battle made England the nation and power it was from then forward through centuries.
It also explained the behavior, rather bizarre to our eyes, of soldiers and nobles who still lived by what they considered the code of chivalry. This code was strong in England and even stronger in France. It is perhaps no accident that there were many Lancelots, Gawains, Tristrams, and Arthurs among the casualties on the French side, and only one Tristram recorded killed on the English. The ideal of Knightly Battle was stronger among the French, as reflected in their names, their bickering, and their casualty rolls.
I was delighted by some of the little jewels of historical fact with which Barker sprinkled this book. The origin of the term "indenture," as in "indentured servant," in the physical form of the paper used to record such a contract. The supposed origin of the British two-fingered version of that impolite gesture known to some in America, in its middle-finger only version, as the Hawaiian Good Luck Sign. There were a number of such little tidbits, all enlightening and delightful.
Highly recommended for fans of history.
Agincourt was too foreign a battle for me to understand. I had thought it was a rather pointless battle; a great English victory, certainly, but fought for no good reason in a cause that was ultimately futile. Barker's book changed all that. It explained why, in the foreign culture that was England of 1415, the campaign was necessary and logical. It explained why, as the title states, the battle made England the nation and power it was from then forward through centuries.
It also explained the behavior, rather bizarre to our eyes, of soldiers and nobles who still lived by what they considered the code of chivalry. This code was strong in England and even stronger in France. It is perhaps no accident that there were many Lancelots, Gawains, Tristrams, and Arthurs among the casualties on the French side, and only one Tristram recorded killed on the English. The ideal of Knightly Battle was stronger among the French, as reflected in their names, their bickering, and their casualty rolls.
I was delighted by some of the little jewels of historical fact with which Barker sprinkled this book. The origin of the term "indenture," as in "indentured servant," in the physical form of the paper used to record such a contract. The supposed origin of the British two-fingered version of that impolite gesture known to some in America, in its middle-finger only version, as the Hawaiian Good Luck Sign. There were a number of such little tidbits, all enlightening and delightful.
Highly recommended for fans of history.
October 25, 2022
Kind of disappointed in this telling of the battle. More time was spent on other topics rather than the battle itself. Full of information that at times felt a little to much. The author obviously knows the subject and gives lots of details. Just not presented in a interesting way for me. I did enjoy learning more about Henry V though. Just wish more time was spent on the battle itself.
September 20, 2015
Reading this after a number of non-fiction books on Charles of Orleans and the 100 Years War, was a great set up. I don't think I would have understood most of these subtle personality and context insults toward secure loyalties, if I had not.
What keeps it being a 5 star is that although the tone and research are 5 star excellent to detail, physical reality, material substances and religion related motivations, there was still strong author assumption, IMHO. "Because I said so" is not conclusive end research.
Henry V was a pistol and displayed his time's ideal pinnacle role model to sublime perfection.
It's weird to realize how different the entire future of Europe in its eventual nation unit form could have been. Easily. And how all those French nobles, wanting to be in the front guard and vanguard positions for future pecking order and other reasons of idealist valour, DID result in the horrendous piling up and self-slaughter by their very own actions.
The photographs of art, artifacts, equipment, jewelry and tombs included in the middle of the book; those were fabulous. 5 plus star-outstanding. Especially that jewelry /talisman worn by the men of certain division, house, or role (such as bowman or knight).
What keeps it being a 5 star is that although the tone and research are 5 star excellent to detail, physical reality, material substances and religion related motivations, there was still strong author assumption, IMHO. "Because I said so" is not conclusive end research.
Henry V was a pistol and displayed his time's ideal pinnacle role model to sublime perfection.
It's weird to realize how different the entire future of Europe in its eventual nation unit form could have been. Easily. And how all those French nobles, wanting to be in the front guard and vanguard positions for future pecking order and other reasons of idealist valour, DID result in the horrendous piling up and self-slaughter by their very own actions.
The photographs of art, artifacts, equipment, jewelry and tombs included in the middle of the book; those were fabulous. 5 plus star-outstanding. Especially that jewelry /talisman worn by the men of certain division, house, or role (such as bowman or knight).
November 20, 2017
This was not only one of the best books I read in 2017; it was also by far the most fun Historically.
This is one of those books for me personally that I did not want to conclude. Ms. Juliet Barker has that sort of ability with writing, and that sort of gift to convey to others in a crisp and clear form where the flow, wit, and courage of a difficult topic for modern times sails as though it is music as opposed to mere words. I have read some History books this year (and in other years) where the seemingly interesting material became a hack job whereby the author simply didn’t keep pace with the subject matter or events but rather became lost in the minutiae that bore little resemblance to the otherwise interesting topic. “Agincourt: Henry V and the battle that made England” is a book for modern times balanced on effective historical documentation and written to cross generational lines of readers. I most certainly would encourage any reader of History to read this book, regardless of personal era of history that one has over the other.
King Henry V is lost to history to some degree for the tantrum random marriages and beheadings of his great grandson King Henry VIII. King Henry V is still my overall favorite English King to History – he did many things that were ahead of their time and he was not afraid of the battlefield. He was well trained to take the throne when King Henry IV passed away in 1413 – most importantly my favorite battle to history would change the official language of French to English in the Royal Court going forward. Ms. Barker takes the reader through the passages of time that led up to the Battle of Agincourt; along the way she provides a description of medieval processes of making bows, arrows, gun powder, cannon, food stores, and other such related activities that reflected to me the acquisition process of the era and the challenges that had to be overcome in cross channel movement of all the forces under King Henry V command. I found the development of the cannon fascinating and this was presented in a manner that flowed as smooth as silk to the passage of time as opposed to words to mind. The church bell foundries were the first to begin making cannon. The earliest shapes were bell like which explains the early development and strange looks of cannon made of brass and bronze. By the early 15th century is when the elongated shapes began to take form – still, firing these were highly ineffective (inaccuracies would take a few centuries yet to correct) and these would fire cannon balls or stone balls weighing anywhere from 5 to 850 pounds. I was only slightly disappointed that the author did not discuss in these earlier pages of cannon the development and history of the Arquebus (sometimes spelled harquebus, harkbus or hackbut; from Dutch haakbus, meaning "hook gun”) It is here in Agincourt where the gun is first recorded as having been successfully employed. It had an effective firing range of 25 yards downhill, and had to be employed with a tripod (rather a "hook" at the tall end of the pole - hence "hook gun") almost as bulky and heavy as the gun itself. Following the account of the battle, Ms. Barker reveals the history to the records of the Exchequer which report that Roger Hunt, an archer in the retinue of the Lancashire Knight Sir James Harrington, had the misfortune “to be killed in battle of Agincourt cum uno gune (with a gun.)” What isn’t reported in this accounting to this book is that the Frenchman who fired the gun was also killed by the same archer. Archer Roger Hunt had been found with a gaping hole in his stomach, the Frenchman was found dead with an arrow in his chest and the Arquebus lay nearby. The first recorded casualty in battle by a gun was recorded here as having occurred on 25 October 1415. I must admit, for as slightly disappointed as I was that the development of the Arquebus was not included to this masterpiece of a book, I was quite ecstatic when I crossed the detail of the casualty on page 284.
Art Work: There are 35 well defined art pieces as photographs from museums and historical locations attached within the pages of the book – this only added great value for me personally as it brought to life the history I was reading. The one piece among others that stands out is the King Henry V official portrait. The portrait only displays one side of his face; the other side was badly injured at the Battle of Shrewsbury in July of 1403. The only question that remains on the portrait is whether it is “true” to form of his likeness. According to the National Portrait Gallery in Great Britain, the painting is circa 1540 – King Henry V died in 1423. In a deep sense, I have no reason to disbelieve this portrait – I just am now more curious than before.
This book has a chalk full of other interesting information of historical significance and truth that I do not wish to expose within this review, matters to ship counts, bow and string making for arrows (cross-bow and long-bow), victuals, armory of the Knights (to include the padding they wore under the armor) and much more. Continuous students of history should take this book up as a challenge for his or her own comprehension of the times, the people, the efforts, the struggle, and the knowledge as to how the United Kingdom came to be during these days of England.
This is one of those books for me personally that I did not want to conclude. Ms. Juliet Barker has that sort of ability with writing, and that sort of gift to convey to others in a crisp and clear form where the flow, wit, and courage of a difficult topic for modern times sails as though it is music as opposed to mere words. I have read some History books this year (and in other years) where the seemingly interesting material became a hack job whereby the author simply didn’t keep pace with the subject matter or events but rather became lost in the minutiae that bore little resemblance to the otherwise interesting topic. “Agincourt: Henry V and the battle that made England” is a book for modern times balanced on effective historical documentation and written to cross generational lines of readers. I most certainly would encourage any reader of History to read this book, regardless of personal era of history that one has over the other.
King Henry V is lost to history to some degree for the tantrum random marriages and beheadings of his great grandson King Henry VIII. King Henry V is still my overall favorite English King to History – he did many things that were ahead of their time and he was not afraid of the battlefield. He was well trained to take the throne when King Henry IV passed away in 1413 – most importantly my favorite battle to history would change the official language of French to English in the Royal Court going forward. Ms. Barker takes the reader through the passages of time that led up to the Battle of Agincourt; along the way she provides a description of medieval processes of making bows, arrows, gun powder, cannon, food stores, and other such related activities that reflected to me the acquisition process of the era and the challenges that had to be overcome in cross channel movement of all the forces under King Henry V command. I found the development of the cannon fascinating and this was presented in a manner that flowed as smooth as silk to the passage of time as opposed to words to mind. The church bell foundries were the first to begin making cannon. The earliest shapes were bell like which explains the early development and strange looks of cannon made of brass and bronze. By the early 15th century is when the elongated shapes began to take form – still, firing these were highly ineffective (inaccuracies would take a few centuries yet to correct) and these would fire cannon balls or stone balls weighing anywhere from 5 to 850 pounds. I was only slightly disappointed that the author did not discuss in these earlier pages of cannon the development and history of the Arquebus (sometimes spelled harquebus, harkbus or hackbut; from Dutch haakbus, meaning "hook gun”) It is here in Agincourt where the gun is first recorded as having been successfully employed. It had an effective firing range of 25 yards downhill, and had to be employed with a tripod (rather a "hook" at the tall end of the pole - hence "hook gun") almost as bulky and heavy as the gun itself. Following the account of the battle, Ms. Barker reveals the history to the records of the Exchequer which report that Roger Hunt, an archer in the retinue of the Lancashire Knight Sir James Harrington, had the misfortune “to be killed in battle of Agincourt cum uno gune (with a gun.)” What isn’t reported in this accounting to this book is that the Frenchman who fired the gun was also killed by the same archer. Archer Roger Hunt had been found with a gaping hole in his stomach, the Frenchman was found dead with an arrow in his chest and the Arquebus lay nearby. The first recorded casualty in battle by a gun was recorded here as having occurred on 25 October 1415. I must admit, for as slightly disappointed as I was that the development of the Arquebus was not included to this masterpiece of a book, I was quite ecstatic when I crossed the detail of the casualty on page 284.
Art Work: There are 35 well defined art pieces as photographs from museums and historical locations attached within the pages of the book – this only added great value for me personally as it brought to life the history I was reading. The one piece among others that stands out is the King Henry V official portrait. The portrait only displays one side of his face; the other side was badly injured at the Battle of Shrewsbury in July of 1403. The only question that remains on the portrait is whether it is “true” to form of his likeness. According to the National Portrait Gallery in Great Britain, the painting is circa 1540 – King Henry V died in 1423. In a deep sense, I have no reason to disbelieve this portrait – I just am now more curious than before.
This book has a chalk full of other interesting information of historical significance and truth that I do not wish to expose within this review, matters to ship counts, bow and string making for arrows (cross-bow and long-bow), victuals, armory of the Knights (to include the padding they wore under the armor) and much more. Continuous students of history should take this book up as a challenge for his or her own comprehension of the times, the people, the efforts, the struggle, and the knowledge as to how the United Kingdom came to be during these days of England.
October 23, 2013
Very good history of "the Agincourt War", and Henry V. Barker is not distracted by the wider perpectives and keeps a tight focus of events as they relate to Agincourt, which is helpful because it keeps things clear and to the point. She gives a strong description of motivations (on both sides) and how those translate to the events as we know them. The key element of French royal paralysis due to a mad king, and uncertain dauphin and the rival factions of Burgundy and Orléans is adequately brought to light to help explain the French perspective. Barker is aided by several eye-witness reports (the anonymous terrified chaplain stands out) and a strong grasp of secondary sources and general literature on the subject. Her good overal perspective and attention to detail, both personal, political and financial - a real plus - combine to make this both a very readable and useful account of the subject. Highly recommended.
December 15, 2020
This was recommended to me by someone who's opinion I trust, so I expected a good book going in. It exceeded my expectations.
Despite the title, this is not just an examination of the Battle of Agincourt. It occupies a central place in book, but it is more than that. The book starts with a brief description of the fourteenth-century succession crisis that ended with Edward III claiming the throne of France. The first parts of the Hundred Years War are covered in a similar amount of clear brevity. Then we get to Henry IV and Henry V.
The first detailed part of the book goes into Henry of Monmouth's (the future Henry V) campaigns in Wales, and how that shaped his future outlook on warfare. The campaign was generally underfunded, and Henry had to scrape together the resources to bring the rebellion in Wales to an end. This mostly happened after he figured out ways of better financing it on his own.
Much time is spent with the beginning of Henry V's reign, and the various diplomatic maneuvers with France even as he secures funding from Parliament, and begins putting together an army. This forms a significant part of the book, and a nicely detailed one, using lots of examples of surviving registers and indentures to show how the army was hired and organized and paid.
Then there is a good section on the siege of Harfleur. It also goes into detail, and takes a look at was (and wasn't) happening at the French court during all of this. The march towards Calais afterwords is also very well covered, including the fact that it had nearly reached its goal before having to turn aside to look for safe river crossings. Much appreciated is the look at how long this was expected to take, and why, and just how much of the march went off on schedule.
And then we get to the field of Agincourt, the day before, and the battle itself. In some ways, this isn't as well-covered as the lead up to the battle, but that's more the high bar the rest of the book set rather than an actual lack here.
After that, there is good examination of the aftermath. The main subject boils down to the prisoners taken, and their fates. This is harder to determine in detail, but Barker spends some time picking out examples. The political and military aftermath get less attention than the lead up.
It's a well-written, and well-focused book, without being so focused as to lose some essential context. In fact, the context (especially Henry V's early career) is the best part of the book. Highly recommended for anyone wanting to know more about this period.
Despite the title, this is not just an examination of the Battle of Agincourt. It occupies a central place in book, but it is more than that. The book starts with a brief description of the fourteenth-century succession crisis that ended with Edward III claiming the throne of France. The first parts of the Hundred Years War are covered in a similar amount of clear brevity. Then we get to Henry IV and Henry V.
The first detailed part of the book goes into Henry of Monmouth's (the future Henry V) campaigns in Wales, and how that shaped his future outlook on warfare. The campaign was generally underfunded, and Henry had to scrape together the resources to bring the rebellion in Wales to an end. This mostly happened after he figured out ways of better financing it on his own.
Much time is spent with the beginning of Henry V's reign, and the various diplomatic maneuvers with France even as he secures funding from Parliament, and begins putting together an army. This forms a significant part of the book, and a nicely detailed one, using lots of examples of surviving registers and indentures to show how the army was hired and organized and paid.
Then there is a good section on the siege of Harfleur. It also goes into detail, and takes a look at was (and wasn't) happening at the French court during all of this. The march towards Calais afterwords is also very well covered, including the fact that it had nearly reached its goal before having to turn aside to look for safe river crossings. Much appreciated is the look at how long this was expected to take, and why, and just how much of the march went off on schedule.
And then we get to the field of Agincourt, the day before, and the battle itself. In some ways, this isn't as well-covered as the lead up to the battle, but that's more the high bar the rest of the book set rather than an actual lack here.
After that, there is good examination of the aftermath. The main subject boils down to the prisoners taken, and their fates. This is harder to determine in detail, but Barker spends some time picking out examples. The political and military aftermath get less attention than the lead up.
It's a well-written, and well-focused book, without being so focused as to lose some essential context. In fact, the context (especially Henry V's early career) is the best part of the book. Highly recommended for anyone wanting to know more about this period.
November 21, 2016
A readable, interesting account of the build up, execution and aftermath of Henry V's Agincourt campaign, brought to life with plenty of contemporary accounts and interesting asides (one of my favourites being about Roland le Fartere, a minstrel whose trick was to leap, whistle and... fart). As the subtitle says this is a history of the King, the campaign and the battle, and the battle itself is covered in a single chapter, so if you're looking for a detailed military history of the Battle of Agincourt you may want to look elsewhere. However if you want to understand the wider context and reasons for Agincourt this is worth a look.
This is a richly detailed book - although the author does have a tendency to write in lists, especially when she's writing about the preparations and financing of the campaign or to a slightly lesser extent the aftermath. For some people this attention to detail might be a plus, but I found it a little tedious after a while, although it's wasn't a major problem.
I'd definitely recommend this, especially if - like me - you're new to the period. It's left me wanting to know more about the Hundred Years War.
This is a richly detailed book - although the author does have a tendency to write in lists, especially when she's writing about the preparations and financing of the campaign or to a slightly lesser extent the aftermath. For some people this attention to detail might be a plus, but I found it a little tedious after a while, although it's wasn't a major problem.
I'd definitely recommend this, especially if - like me - you're new to the period. It's left me wanting to know more about the Hundred Years War.
November 11, 2020
An insightful, well-researched history of the battle.
Barker does a great job putting the battle into the context of the larger campaign, and provides a good portrait of Henry V and his piety, tact, and charisma. She also explains how firmly Henry believed himself to be King of France, despite the ambiguity of his claim (since his father had deposed Richard II and France was in the midst of a civil war) Barker does a fine job explaining how the armies were raised, paid, trained, and supplied, as well as how they fought. Barker also explains the divisions, bad luck, hubris and stupidity among the French, and vividly captures the course of the battle and the human element.
The narrative is clear, but the section on the royal lineages can get a bit tedious, and some more maps would have helped; the ones that are in the book aren’t as detailed as some might like. There is also little on the battle’s larger significance, and she seems to read a few sources uncritically (like Henry surviving an arrow to the skull or arrows “literally” blackening the sky) She also claims that Henry’s massacre of prisoners was some sort of military necessity. Barker never really analyzes the battle either.
Still, an entertaining, well-written and readable work.
Barker does a great job putting the battle into the context of the larger campaign, and provides a good portrait of Henry V and his piety, tact, and charisma. She also explains how firmly Henry believed himself to be King of France, despite the ambiguity of his claim (since his father had deposed Richard II and France was in the midst of a civil war) Barker does a fine job explaining how the armies were raised, paid, trained, and supplied, as well as how they fought. Barker also explains the divisions, bad luck, hubris and stupidity among the French, and vividly captures the course of the battle and the human element.
The narrative is clear, but the section on the royal lineages can get a bit tedious, and some more maps would have helped; the ones that are in the book aren’t as detailed as some might like. There is also little on the battle’s larger significance, and she seems to read a few sources uncritically (like Henry surviving an arrow to the skull or arrows “literally” blackening the sky) She also claims that Henry’s massacre of prisoners was some sort of military necessity. Barker never really analyzes the battle either.
Still, an entertaining, well-written and readable work.
March 29, 2023
Juliet Barker has produced is a nicely written and fairly detailed account of the Battle of Agincourt, the events that lead up to it, the aftermath, the politics, the culture, and how Henry V financed his war. The book includes maps and 2 colour plate inserts of photographs.
April 18, 2009
The Battle of Agincourt is one of the most, if not the most, famous battles in British history. I didn't know that until reading this book. I'd never read Shakespeare's history plays on Henry IV and Prince Hal, so my knowledge of King Henry V was nonexistent prior to diving into this book.
I recently heard a quote in a British TV mini-series, "A war with France is traditional." How true this was for many centuries. In the midst of the Hundred Years' War, Henry V waged a battle with Charles VI of France to claim the throne that he felt was due to him based on the rights of inheritance through his ancestor Edward III. After capturing the French town of Harfleur, which was lost because the French monarchy neglected to send protection from the English, Henry V and his army trudged on toward Calais. What later resulted was the battle of Agincourt, in which Henry's army defeated the French even though they were outnumbered six to one (although the exact ratio varies from scholars).
Barker did a great deal of research for her book, giving numerous names, dates, ancestries and even romantic entanglements of some of the battle's participants. She gives the details of nearly every aspect of battle, e.g., how the Englishmen confessed their sins to the chaplain on the eve of the big battle because they assumed they would be killed by the French the following day.
I never thought I would be as engrossed with medieval history as I was while reading this book. For a nonfiction book filled with dates and names that I can't pronounce, Agincourt was actually not a difficult read. I was a bit intimidated when I picked it up at the library, but it proved to be much easier than expected. It makes me want to check out other books pertaining to this period in European history.
I recently heard a quote in a British TV mini-series, "A war with France is traditional." How true this was for many centuries. In the midst of the Hundred Years' War, Henry V waged a battle with Charles VI of France to claim the throne that he felt was due to him based on the rights of inheritance through his ancestor Edward III. After capturing the French town of Harfleur, which was lost because the French monarchy neglected to send protection from the English, Henry V and his army trudged on toward Calais. What later resulted was the battle of Agincourt, in which Henry's army defeated the French even though they were outnumbered six to one (although the exact ratio varies from scholars).
Barker did a great deal of research for her book, giving numerous names, dates, ancestries and even romantic entanglements of some of the battle's participants. She gives the details of nearly every aspect of battle, e.g., how the Englishmen confessed their sins to the chaplain on the eve of the big battle because they assumed they would be killed by the French the following day.
I never thought I would be as engrossed with medieval history as I was while reading this book. For a nonfiction book filled with dates and names that I can't pronounce, Agincourt was actually not a difficult read. I was a bit intimidated when I picked it up at the library, but it proved to be much easier than expected. It makes me want to check out other books pertaining to this period in European history.
November 24, 2017
I don’t think any book about a battle is ever just about the battle, and this one is no exception. There is a quick history of the events which led to the Hundred Years War between England and France, and then, as the title infers, Henry V’s life is covered from the time of his father’s usurpation of the crown to the time of the battle. Then there’s the campaign, starting with Henry’s first thoughts about his right to the French crown. We’re led through the gathering of the men, their journey over, their landing and the battle for Harfleur, and then, finally, the march to Calais. All has been meticulously researched.
even with all that detail, it’s still very readable book, though sometimes the author does get a bit carried away. While I may like to know who led which battle, and who were the major players on both sides, I didn’t necessarily need to know how many of what each of them brought with them to the campaign: how many archers, how many men-at-arms, how many horses, how many arrows, and how much of what each supplied when it came to food and drink.
Still, that’s a minor flaw in an otherwise engaging book. I’m looking forward to reading its sequel, Conquest, which picks up the story of Henry’s invasion of France.
even with all that detail, it’s still very readable book, though sometimes the author does get a bit carried away. While I may like to know who led which battle, and who were the major players on both sides, I didn’t necessarily need to know how many of what each of them brought with them to the campaign: how many archers, how many men-at-arms, how many horses, how many arrows, and how much of what each supplied when it came to food and drink.
Still, that’s a minor flaw in an otherwise engaging book. I’m looking forward to reading its sequel, Conquest, which picks up the story of Henry’s invasion of France.
March 28, 2024
关于阿金库尔的书可谓汗牛充栋了，所以至少于我而言，这本书最值得读的部分，反而不是关于阿金库尔战役本身，而是诸如骑士册封仪式的流程、长弓的性能、长弓手的能力、军事契约的细节、不同职业的薪资水平、战利品的分配制度等等内容。
因此从这个意义上讲，一场战役的进程和意义，无论在后人的叙事里占据多么重要的地位，也只是人类历史里最直观的那一个维度。
其余的，全在细节之中。
因此从这个意义上讲，一场战役的进程和意义，无论在后人的叙事里占据多么重要的地位，也只是人类历史里最直观的那一个维度。
其余的，全在细节之中。
February 2, 2017
A detailed account of the preparations, execution and aftermath of the Battle of Agincourt, the battle that made England
Henry V, son of the usurper Henry IV, made two promises: first to rule with good governance, in order to show his legitimacy as a good king (after all, he was the son of a usurper) and secondly, to recover Normandy and the lands of Aquitaine. By this, he had made himself a hostage to fortune, and by not living up to his promises this would be used as an excuse for every sort of opposition.
For Henry V, that he should become king of France was Gods will. From the start, he prepared for war. He succeeded in getting the support of the church, made sure the Scots would not trouble him and made his peace at home. Once this was done, he set sail for France.
France in the meantime, was embroiled in a civil war which was just concluded with the Peace of Arras. On the French throne was Charles VI, incapacitated by a mental disease (which would later on also struck Henry's son Henry VI, resulting in the War of the Roses). This was to the advantage of Henry V, where he could land unopposed and take Hanfleur, without encountering any resistance. It was in his long marck to Calais where he would win his spurs.
The battle itself was won against all odds. The fine fleur of the French royalty would be massacred and allow the further conquest of Normandy later on.
This book gives a detailed overview of the battle itself, but also the buildup that went before. It therefore is a good introduction to the events surrounding the battle and sets it in a broader historical context. One thing that did not live up to the promise to the title is the fact that in general the book gives a good account of the battle itself, it does not sufficiently explain why this battle "made England", as promised in the title. All in all, 4 stars.
Henry V, son of the usurper Henry IV, made two promises: first to rule with good governance, in order to show his legitimacy as a good king (after all, he was the son of a usurper) and secondly, to recover Normandy and the lands of Aquitaine. By this, he had made himself a hostage to fortune, and by not living up to his promises this would be used as an excuse for every sort of opposition.
For Henry V, that he should become king of France was Gods will. From the start, he prepared for war. He succeeded in getting the support of the church, made sure the Scots would not trouble him and made his peace at home. Once this was done, he set sail for France.
France in the meantime, was embroiled in a civil war which was just concluded with the Peace of Arras. On the French throne was Charles VI, incapacitated by a mental disease (which would later on also struck Henry's son Henry VI, resulting in the War of the Roses). This was to the advantage of Henry V, where he could land unopposed and take Hanfleur, without encountering any resistance. It was in his long marck to Calais where he would win his spurs.
The battle itself was won against all odds. The fine fleur of the French royalty would be massacred and allow the further conquest of Normandy later on.
This book gives a detailed overview of the battle itself, but also the buildup that went before. It therefore is a good introduction to the events surrounding the battle and sets it in a broader historical context. One thing that did not live up to the promise to the title is the fact that in general the book gives a good account of the battle itself, it does not sufficiently explain why this battle "made England", as promised in the title. All in all, 4 stars.
February 25, 2017
Great overview of Henry V's first campaign in France, that resulted in the taking of Harfleur and the huge English victory at Agincourt.
The real story behind one of Shakespeare's best remembered History plays!
Highly recommended as a popular account of the Agincourt campaign.
The real story behind one of Shakespeare's best remembered History plays!
Highly recommended as a popular account of the Agincourt campaign.
February 2, 2012
While 'Agincourt' is clearly a well-researched work, Juliet Barker breaks little new ground. The organisational and motivational abilities and piety and chivalry of Henry V have never been in doubt; nor have the insanity of King Charles VI of France, the cowardice of his son, the dauphin, or the divided nature of the French aristocracy (many of whom behaved in a remarkably chivalrous way themselves) of the day.
Barker's insistence on disagreeing with recent historians of the period, without giving much evidence to the contrary, as well as her seeming inability to fault a single action Henry undertook, grate after a while. The story is well told, with facts and figures in the right places, concentration on the correct characters (Raoul de Gaucourt, who, still suffering from the dysentery which had afflicted him at the siege of Harfleur, gave himself up as a prisoner of Henry at the appointed date), etc, but questions remain unanswered in this work as to Henry's risking the lives of his 6,000 men against a much larger and fitter French force. The piety of the day is insufficient explanation for this and other actions, which Barker glosses over with too reverential a tone for an historical work.
Barker's insistence on disagreeing with recent historians of the period, without giving much evidence to the contrary, as well as her seeming inability to fault a single action Henry undertook, grate after a while. The story is well told, with facts and figures in the right places, concentration on the correct characters (Raoul de Gaucourt, who, still suffering from the dysentery which had afflicted him at the siege of Harfleur, gave himself up as a prisoner of Henry at the appointed date), etc, but questions remain unanswered in this work as to Henry's risking the lives of his 6,000 men against a much larger and fitter French force. The piety of the day is insufficient explanation for this and other actions, which Barker glosses over with too reverential a tone for an historical work.
April 9, 2018
Dan Carlin, the voice of Hardcore History, often says, "History is better than fiction." This book is proof. It is probably the best researched and written book on Agincourt that I have come across. Even as Barker describes Henry V's world with rich detail, she keeps us moving forward in an easily readable book that is expertly written.
I did not want to put it down and as soon ass I reached the final page, I went to look if Barker has a follow-up book on Henry's 2nd campaign. To my delight she does and Conquest will be bumped to the top of my reading list as soon as I can get my hands on a copy.
The only thing that keeps me from giving it a full five stars is that Barker falls into the common trap of giving us too much economic detail. Because people of this time tended to keep a much better record of economic and monetary transactions than they did of other aspects of life, a disproportionate amount of the record historians have to pull from is of a fiscal nature. They, in turn, have a tendency to write a disproportionately large amount of their work on the same. While Barker is not nearly so bad as some others, I do believe she spent more time and detail than was necessary for a work this size writing on how Henry was able to finance his campaigns.
I did not want to put it down and as soon ass I reached the final page, I went to look if Barker has a follow-up book on Henry's 2nd campaign. To my delight she does and Conquest will be bumped to the top of my reading list as soon as I can get my hands on a copy.
The only thing that keeps me from giving it a full five stars is that Barker falls into the common trap of giving us too much economic detail. Because people of this time tended to keep a much better record of economic and monetary transactions than they did of other aspects of life, a disproportionate amount of the record historians have to pull from is of a fiscal nature. They, in turn, have a tendency to write a disproportionately large amount of their work on the same. While Barker is not nearly so bad as some others, I do believe she spent more time and detail than was necessary for a work this size writing on how Henry was able to finance his campaigns.
October 1, 2008
This is a well researched book, and I learned much more about 15th century chivalry than I expected. Barker provides ample detail from contemporary sources, usually presenting the reader with the range of accounts provided at the time as well as what the "received" understanding is today. Occasionally, she asserts her own opinion in contrast to general opinion.
I bought the book to learn how Henry was able to win the battle of Agincourt, and I did learn that through this book. My only criticism is that while from time to time I found myself skimming past the abundant detail about, say, which French nobles fetched how much ransom, the chronology of the actual battle was not nearly as detailed as I had hoped.
I bought the book to learn how Henry was able to win the battle of Agincourt, and I did learn that through this book. My only criticism is that while from time to time I found myself skimming past the abundant detail about, say, which French nobles fetched how much ransom, the chronology of the actual battle was not nearly as detailed as I had hoped.
June 14, 2017
Ένας από τους λίγους ευχάριστους τρόπους που μπορώ να ασχοληθώ με την ιστορία, μια συναρπαστική διήγηση.
(audio book)
(audio book)
October 26, 2016
Oh my goodness I just love Juliet Barker's historical writing. Clear lovely sentences, strong narrative pacing, and well chosen examples from primary sources. She straightforwardly corrects myths (and other historians), and/or says, "actually yes the myth is right and here's how we know". Best of all, she points out interesting or important parts of the historical events that aren't in the popular understanding of the story. Never a slog.
January 20, 2020
I've been a fan of Barker's work ever since I first read The Brontes some years ago. She never pulls her punches in terms of detailed analysis and exhaustive exhumation of supporting evidence, and her books are an undertaking to read, but she always make the narrative immersive and highly readable. This was an excellent exploration of the events leading up to and surrounding the battle of Azincourt, 25th Ocober 1415, with a slight biographical slant towards Henry V. Barker always allows the historical figures she writes about to be complete individuals with both flaws and better character traits, which always far more heartening than 'Richard II was a monster' or 'Edward the Confessor was a saint' etc. We'll never know the absolute truth, of course, because in terms of history truth depends largely on pov, but I feel Barker gets far closer to it than most other historians do. (It being very easy for our own personal preferences and biases towards a historical figure to enter even the most well intentioned historical account.) That said, her work is never devoid of her opinion; rather she supports her position with evidence and never presents opinion as fact. This was an intense but highly enjoyable read. Recommended.
July 1, 2017
There are some remarkable leadership lessons in the first half of this interesting account of Henry V's Agincourt Campaign. The last third of the book captures the aftermath of war, noting in detail the decimation of a good portion of the French nobility, and the lengthy hostage negotiations for those who were captured. For me, this last bit was a slog, and I'd recommend to the casual reader that it might not be a good investment of time to stay with it until the end. For the more academically inclined, there are likely better ways to get data on the aftermath of the conflict.
February 27, 2020
This was a well written book about Agincourt. The author really keeps Agincourt in scope without the broader social history of the time other than events or people directly related to the battle such as the mad French king who thought he was made of glass, the English archers (who were medieval machine guns!) and the political factions of the Burgundian's vs Armagnac's (which I didn't know a lot about and found fascinating). She presents a very detailed look at the lead up to the battle and the battle itself but in a very accessible way. I would have liked more analysis post-Agincourt but the impact on the French nobility either through death or imprisonment was truly astonishing and has inspired me to read more about this time period.
October 10, 2023
All wars require four things: soldiers, food, weapons, and financing. This book discusses how England mobilized for war with details like the requisition of millions of goose feathers (to make the arrows which were decisive on the muddy field at Agincourt).
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 26, 2015
Although I have always been interested in History, majored in U.S. History in college, and have almost exclusively read History books since, I never knew much about Agincourt except that it was a major English victory during the Hundred Years War. When the anniversary of the Battle of Agincourt passed last month, I decided to learn some more about the battle and chose Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England by Juliet Barker.
Barker’s Agincourt isn’t just about the Battle of Agincourt alone, but about the campaign as a whole, including the siege of Harfleur, the reasons and preparation for the campaign, and the after effects of the campaign. The book is roughly divided into three sections. The first section brings the reader to the rise of Henry V, explains why Henry V has a claim to the throne of France, develops Henry V’s personality and character, and explains how England prepared both militarily and financially for the Agincourt campaign. The second section covers the campaign itself, including the siege of Harfleur, the fractious nature of the French, the Battle of Agincourt itself, and the reasons why the French lost. The third section explains the effect the battle and campaign had on both the French and English and looks at what happened to members of both the English and French nobility in years that followed, foreshadowing future conflict between the two. Barker’s writing is compelling and holds the reader’s attention; she even manages to keep the reader interested when explaining the financial preparations for the campaign. As someone who isn’t versed in the various levels of nobility, the book never bogs down over rank/social status and she does a wonderful job of explaining how chivalry explained many actions and behavior. She does an excellent job in bringing Henry V to life, showing how there were both practical and moral motivations for many of his actions. She also handles Henry V’s controversial order to kill prisoners at the end of the battle, looking at the decision from several perspectives.
While reading Agincourt, I was particularly struck by two things: the personality and character of Henry V and the organizational differences between the English and French. Henry V seems to have been an extraordinary leader – experienced, energetic, practical, and pious with a commanding personality. He seems to have recognized talent and ability and let bygones be bygones (within reason) when the situation called for it. The organizational and leadership differences between the English and the French were simply night and day and came down to Unity of Command; the English had it and the French did not. The English had once clear commander and leader in Henry V. The French had no once clear commander in the field and as a result many of the nobility were at the front trying to do the same thing – advance their chivalric reputation. That ended up being one of the primary reasons the battle was lost, there was no one central leader to assign responsibilities then hold those commanders responsible as Henry V did with the English.
Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England is an interesting and informative read; I enjoyed it thoroughly. I not only learned a lot about Henry V and the Agincourt Campaign, it whetted my appetite to learn more about the Hundred Years War and what came before and after Agincourt. I’ve already bought Conquest: The English Kingdom of France, 1417-1450 and it will be my next read. The only complaint that I have is one that I have with many military histories – a lack of maps. The Kindle version of Agincourt has no maps. Maps of where the English landed in France, their positions in the siege of Harfleur, movements of the French toward the English, and maps of the battlefield and movements during the battle would make the campaign, siege, and battle much easier to visualize and make it much easier to understand where the forces were in relation to each other. If the print version has maps, it would definitely be a five star book, but the Kindle version is a four star book for the lack of maps.
Barker’s Agincourt isn’t just about the Battle of Agincourt alone, but about the campaign as a whole, including the siege of Harfleur, the reasons and preparation for the campaign, and the after effects of the campaign. The book is roughly divided into three sections. The first section brings the reader to the rise of Henry V, explains why Henry V has a claim to the throne of France, develops Henry V’s personality and character, and explains how England prepared both militarily and financially for the Agincourt campaign. The second section covers the campaign itself, including the siege of Harfleur, the fractious nature of the French, the Battle of Agincourt itself, and the reasons why the French lost. The third section explains the effect the battle and campaign had on both the French and English and looks at what happened to members of both the English and French nobility in years that followed, foreshadowing future conflict between the two. Barker’s writing is compelling and holds the reader’s attention; she even manages to keep the reader interested when explaining the financial preparations for the campaign. As someone who isn’t versed in the various levels of nobility, the book never bogs down over rank/social status and she does a wonderful job of explaining how chivalry explained many actions and behavior. She does an excellent job in bringing Henry V to life, showing how there were both practical and moral motivations for many of his actions. She also handles Henry V’s controversial order to kill prisoners at the end of the battle, looking at the decision from several perspectives.
While reading Agincourt, I was particularly struck by two things: the personality and character of Henry V and the organizational differences between the English and French. Henry V seems to have been an extraordinary leader – experienced, energetic, practical, and pious with a commanding personality. He seems to have recognized talent and ability and let bygones be bygones (within reason) when the situation called for it. The organizational and leadership differences between the English and the French were simply night and day and came down to Unity of Command; the English had it and the French did not. The English had once clear commander and leader in Henry V. The French had no once clear commander in the field and as a result many of the nobility were at the front trying to do the same thing – advance their chivalric reputation. That ended up being one of the primary reasons the battle was lost, there was no one central leader to assign responsibilities then hold those commanders responsible as Henry V did with the English.
Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England is an interesting and informative read; I enjoyed it thoroughly. I not only learned a lot about Henry V and the Agincourt Campaign, it whetted my appetite to learn more about the Hundred Years War and what came before and after Agincourt. I’ve already bought Conquest: The English Kingdom of France, 1417-1450 and it will be my next read. The only complaint that I have is one that I have with many military histories – a lack of maps. The Kindle version of Agincourt has no maps. Maps of where the English landed in France, their positions in the siege of Harfleur, movements of the French toward the English, and maps of the battlefield and movements during the battle would make the campaign, siege, and battle much easier to visualize and make it much easier to understand where the forces were in relation to each other. If the print version has maps, it would definitely be a five star book, but the Kindle version is a four star book for the lack of maps.
May 25, 2015
In the fourteenth century, nation-states as we know them did not exist. There was a England, and a France, but their borders were more fluid -- and entangled. The English crown held title to much of France through marriage and ancestry, and because the English royal house descended from a Franco-Norman duke, the king of England was technically a vassal of France. This created the kind of tension released only with knights and massed formations of archers: the Hundred Years War, a series of conflicts between two nations and several royal houses. One of the most memorable episodes of the war was the upset at Agincourt, in which a small English force triumphed against a larger French array. In Agincourt, Juliet Barker tells the story of the battle in such
Henry V's motives for invading France were varied. The old claim of Edward III which inaugurated the Hundred Years War was not his; Henry could barely claim kingship of England, let alone France. His own father was a naked usurper who died early fighting resistance to his claim, and though the cloud of scandal was mostly lifted by the time the handsome young Harry succeeded, it hovered still. France needed addressing, however: it remained a nuisance to English interests on the Continent, not only around Aquitaine but in Flanders. England's prosperity came from trade, lately the Channel had become dangerous for shipping. Securing the coast would make it easier for England to smother piracy, and if the lush interior of France became a crown possession, so much the better!
It was not to be, however. Initial hopes for a display of overwhelming force against the French countryside fell apart during a siege of a French harbor, Harfleur. The port was taken eventually, but its defenders' obstinacy cost the English army dearly. By the time the gates opened, the invading force's strength had been sapped by disease. His numbers too much for the battered city to sustain, Henry decided to retire to the English held-port of Calais. He could limp to safety only through a country of enemies, whose watch over the rivers prevented a quick dash north. After watching the dwindling army for several days, the French finally checked the king's march near the tiny village of Azincourt. Grossly outnumbered and weakened by sickness, the English should have been crushed. Instead, the Battle of Agincourt turned out to be one of the greatest upsets in western history. The section on the actual battle isn't enormous, this is a story of why Agincourt happened and why it was important, and while the full story of the battle is delivered with talent, this isn't a military history. The reasons for victory are there: Henry drawing the French into battle on ground of his choosing, in an area that undermined the French cavalry and allowed the English to make the most of their excellent longbows -- and when the French desperately pushed through the mud and rain of death to assail the archers, the English knights pounced! In later campaigns Henry would achieve his aims (briefly) against the French crown; history would see them reversed, however, squandered by less heroic successors. No one save historians can remember the Treaty of Troyes -- but Agincourt has achieved greater fame. Not only did it save Henry from capture or death, but the miraculous upset seemed to impress upon the English that regardless of the spurious actions of his father, Harry was God's own anointed. Why else would he have been spared? It was a triumph of not just arms, but belief.
There are undoubtedly more detailed military histories of the battle, but Barker's narrative gives the reader both a heroic champion whose surprising victory comes as a delight, and a lot of background information on early 15th-century English society and trade. For an introduction to the battle, it's quite serviceable and easy reading.
Henry V's motives for invading France were varied. The old claim of Edward III which inaugurated the Hundred Years War was not his; Henry could barely claim kingship of England, let alone France. His own father was a naked usurper who died early fighting resistance to his claim, and though the cloud of scandal was mostly lifted by the time the handsome young Harry succeeded, it hovered still. France needed addressing, however: it remained a nuisance to English interests on the Continent, not only around Aquitaine but in Flanders. England's prosperity came from trade, lately the Channel had become dangerous for shipping. Securing the coast would make it easier for England to smother piracy, and if the lush interior of France became a crown possession, so much the better!
It was not to be, however. Initial hopes for a display of overwhelming force against the French countryside fell apart during a siege of a French harbor, Harfleur. The port was taken eventually, but its defenders' obstinacy cost the English army dearly. By the time the gates opened, the invading force's strength had been sapped by disease. His numbers too much for the battered city to sustain, Henry decided to retire to the English held-port of Calais. He could limp to safety only through a country of enemies, whose watch over the rivers prevented a quick dash north. After watching the dwindling army for several days, the French finally checked the king's march near the tiny village of Azincourt. Grossly outnumbered and weakened by sickness, the English should have been crushed. Instead, the Battle of Agincourt turned out to be one of the greatest upsets in western history. The section on the actual battle isn't enormous, this is a story of why Agincourt happened and why it was important, and while the full story of the battle is delivered with talent, this isn't a military history. The reasons for victory are there: Henry drawing the French into battle on ground of his choosing, in an area that undermined the French cavalry and allowed the English to make the most of their excellent longbows -- and when the French desperately pushed through the mud and rain of death to assail the archers, the English knights pounced! In later campaigns Henry would achieve his aims (briefly) against the French crown; history would see them reversed, however, squandered by less heroic successors. No one save historians can remember the Treaty of Troyes -- but Agincourt has achieved greater fame. Not only did it save Henry from capture or death, but the miraculous upset seemed to impress upon the English that regardless of the spurious actions of his father, Harry was God's own anointed. Why else would he have been spared? It was a triumph of not just arms, but belief.
There are undoubtedly more detailed military histories of the battle, but Barker's narrative gives the reader both a heroic champion whose surprising victory comes as a delight, and a lot of background information on early 15th-century English society and trade. For an introduction to the battle, it's quite serviceable and easy reading.
September 12, 2021
Agincourt by Juliet Barker does, pretty much, exactly as it says on the tin. It relates to us the battle which is the book's namesake, the campaign in which it was waged, and the king who was at the centre of it all - King Henry V.
The problem, in my eyes anyway, is actually the same problem I had with Juliet Barker's other book I've read, Conquest; it's just too bloody detailed.
The sheer density of detail can, in my eyes, be excused in the first part of the book. Here Barker is trying to set the stage and in my eyes she succeeds. During this, along side talking about the preparations for war and the rise of King Henry V, we get fairly regular tangents on anything from the various features of medieval life, to mini biographies on the several individuals taking part in the campaign. A lot of it is actually quite interesting, particularly for someone who knows very little about medieval life. The part on medieval surgery I found both fascinating and disturbingly hilarious:
"'[Mondeville, a medieval surgeon] suggested that all doctors should use big words and, if necessary, make up terms to impress their patients: 'the ordinary man believes that pronouncements which he does not understand are more effective than those which he understands perfectly well'. The more imposing the name of the condition the more ill the patient felt himself to be: 'give some awful names to the illnesses of ignorant peasants if you want to get any money out of them', he suggested."
Your mileage, however, may vary. Discussion on the indenture system of raising armies - effectively the precursor to the modern regiment system - fascinates. Discussion on who was paid what however, can get rather dull after a while.
In the second part of the book - covering the actual Agincourt campaign - the detail more often than not gets in the way of the telling of the story. You get a good taste for this in the first chapter of this section. Old King Henry gets a team together to do some reconnaissance ahead of his beach landing to find him some appropriate lodgings for him. Instead of describing the actual mission, we get mini-bio's on the individuals taking part in it!
(To be fair, the description of Cornwaille was fascinating, but come on, lets have some priorities here).
It keeps going like this: from soldier's pay to veritable roll calls of every noble taking part in every action, which in the case of the actual battle for Agincourt, is quite extensive.
The best part of the second part is, perhaps unsurprisingly, the Battle for Agincourt - though it doesn't really last long. If we're including discussion about formations for the battle and the killing of captives afterwards, we get about 20 or so pages in a book that's 382 long (excluding notes, bibliography etc.)
Despite all this, I'm glad I read this book. I now finally know the story - nay, the full story - of the Battle for Agincourt. I learned something. I just wish I was having more fun in the process.
The problem, in my eyes anyway, is actually the same problem I had with Juliet Barker's other book I've read, Conquest; it's just too bloody detailed.
The sheer density of detail can, in my eyes, be excused in the first part of the book. Here Barker is trying to set the stage and in my eyes she succeeds. During this, along side talking about the preparations for war and the rise of King Henry V, we get fairly regular tangents on anything from the various features of medieval life, to mini biographies on the several individuals taking part in the campaign. A lot of it is actually quite interesting, particularly for someone who knows very little about medieval life. The part on medieval surgery I found both fascinating and disturbingly hilarious:
"'[Mondeville, a medieval surgeon] suggested that all doctors should use big words and, if necessary, make up terms to impress their patients: 'the ordinary man believes that pronouncements which he does not understand are more effective than those which he understands perfectly well'. The more imposing the name of the condition the more ill the patient felt himself to be: 'give some awful names to the illnesses of ignorant peasants if you want to get any money out of them', he suggested."
Your mileage, however, may vary. Discussion on the indenture system of raising armies - effectively the precursor to the modern regiment system - fascinates. Discussion on who was paid what however, can get rather dull after a while.
In the second part of the book - covering the actual Agincourt campaign - the detail more often than not gets in the way of the telling of the story. You get a good taste for this in the first chapter of this section. Old King Henry gets a team together to do some reconnaissance ahead of his beach landing to find him some appropriate lodgings for him. Instead of describing the actual mission, we get mini-bio's on the individuals taking part in it!
(To be fair, the description of Cornwaille was fascinating, but come on, lets have some priorities here).
It keeps going like this: from soldier's pay to veritable roll calls of every noble taking part in every action, which in the case of the actual battle for Agincourt, is quite extensive.
The best part of the second part is, perhaps unsurprisingly, the Battle for Agincourt - though it doesn't really last long. If we're including discussion about formations for the battle and the killing of captives afterwards, we get about 20 or so pages in a book that's 382 long (excluding notes, bibliography etc.)
Despite all this, I'm glad I read this book. I now finally know the story - nay, the full story - of the Battle for Agincourt. I learned something. I just wish I was having more fun in the process.
April 7, 2023
When I read incredibly interesting histories like this one, I think of how ineffective history teaching was in school. We learned all the names of the Big Events (Manifest Destiny, Teapot Dome, Entente Cordiale still ring through my head) but were never asked to envision alternatives. That would have required us to understand the influences and constraints of the times, which is what Barker expresses so beautifully in her book. This is no dry recital of dates and battle formations but a vivid reconstruction of the state of the world at the time of Agincourt: all the alliances and factions, what technology Henry was working with, and why he chose to act in ways that sometimes seem strange to us. Barker is an expert in chivalry, and she very effectively shows how that played out in real battle. (As one might expect, some held their honor sacred, while others took it very lightly, breaking their parole--their word as a nobleman that they would return with ransom--at the first chance.)
This is the kind of book that makes you feel that the Middle Ages were not so primitive as we imagine. The weapons they used very much made sense for the castle warfare they were mostly fighting, and the reaction of fortresses with unprotected villages vs. walled towns was very different. (Henry left the walled towns alone since they would take much longer to siege, but the unprotected villages capitulated almost to a one after hearing Harfleur was taken.) Shockingly, medieval people behave much like people today.
One of the joys I took in this was the list of awesome first names: Enguerrand, Clignet, Ponchon, Renault, Hutin, Bohort. Where have all these names gone?! She mentions that there were a bunch of Lancelots and Yvains on the French side but that the English didn't really go in for Arthurian naming. Another funny note is that I recognized a number of unusual names that appear in Anthony Powell's Dance to the Music of Time series, including (Dicky) Umfraville and Odo (Stevens).
The description of the prowess of the archers was quite a thing to read as well. She writes that a normal draw-weight for a military longbow was 150 to 160 pounds, which is about three times what hunters nowadays pull. At this weight, they could fire an arrow 240 yards (hunters today go for about 30), and to be fit for service they needed to be able to fire one every 10 seconds. Apparently skeletons of archers were found in a Tudor warship, and the bone density of their shoulders and arms was insane and their spines were twisted.
Raoul de Gaucourt comes out of this looking like the most badass of knights. Plus, he lived to over 80!!!
This is the kind of book that makes you feel that the Middle Ages were not so primitive as we imagine. The weapons they used very much made sense for the castle warfare they were mostly fighting, and the reaction of fortresses with unprotected villages vs. walled towns was very different. (Henry left the walled towns alone since they would take much longer to siege, but the unprotected villages capitulated almost to a one after hearing Harfleur was taken.) Shockingly, medieval people behave much like people today.
One of the joys I took in this was the list of awesome first names: Enguerrand, Clignet, Ponchon, Renault, Hutin, Bohort. Where have all these names gone?! She mentions that there were a bunch of Lancelots and Yvains on the French side but that the English didn't really go in for Arthurian naming. Another funny note is that I recognized a number of unusual names that appear in Anthony Powell's Dance to the Music of Time series, including (Dicky) Umfraville and Odo (Stevens).
The description of the prowess of the archers was quite a thing to read as well. She writes that a normal draw-weight for a military longbow was 150 to 160 pounds, which is about three times what hunters nowadays pull. At this weight, they could fire an arrow 240 yards (hunters today go for about 30), and to be fit for service they needed to be able to fire one every 10 seconds. Apparently skeletons of archers were found in a Tudor warship, and the bone density of their shoulders and arms was insane and their spines were twisted.
Raoul de Gaucourt comes out of this looking like the most badass of knights. Plus, he lived to over 80!!!
March 9, 2012
This is a book that took me a while to get through, mostly because my expectations were out of line with what the book could have provided. I was looking for deep tactical analysis of the battle itself, instead the book proved to be a comprehensive look at all aspects of the campaign which lead to the battle of Agincourt, from its formation to its conclusion and beyond.
Barker does a great job of selling King Henry V's motivations for the campaign, as well as bringing great respect to his political and administrative capabilities. You'll become intimately familiar with the great pains that were taken in order to ensure proper accounting, as well as Henry's mastery of chivalric propaganda in order to garner great enthusiasm for this and future campaigns. The politics of the Burgundians and the Armagnacs are presented, showing Henry's skill at navigating international diplomacy.
This story is primarily concerned with Henry V, and thus the English side of the conflict, and the author's superb use of primary sources also skews towards the English. The only downside is that the author must give us great explanations of exactly who many of our French players are just before they are killed in the battle itself. The most memorable Frenchman - John the Fearless and the Dauphin, who the author does a great job of bringing to life throughout most of the book, will play no part in the battle of Agincourt whatsoever.
Ultimately I think every reader will come to have a greater appreciation for the culture and character of all sides involved, but I don't think anyone who is familiar with the battle itself will come away with any revelations about the English victory that day. If this is your introduction to the battle, I think it certainly is a fine one, but while I don't consider myself an expert on the battle at all I felt the narrative of the battle itself relied on the fact that I already knew how fearsome the Welsh longbowmen were, and how they could rip through enemy armies with their rain of bodkin arrows. It all works out to be a bit circular, because without Agincourt how many of us would ever know just how fearsome the Welsh longbowmen were anyway?
Be smart, judge this one on its subtitle, because if you're after what Henry V did to win not just the battle but the campaign, then this is certainly the right book.
Barker does a great job of selling King Henry V's motivations for the campaign, as well as bringing great respect to his political and administrative capabilities. You'll become intimately familiar with the great pains that were taken in order to ensure proper accounting, as well as Henry's mastery of chivalric propaganda in order to garner great enthusiasm for this and future campaigns. The politics of the Burgundians and the Armagnacs are presented, showing Henry's skill at navigating international diplomacy.
This story is primarily concerned with Henry V, and thus the English side of the conflict, and the author's superb use of primary sources also skews towards the English. The only downside is that the author must give us great explanations of exactly who many of our French players are just before they are killed in the battle itself. The most memorable Frenchman - John the Fearless and the Dauphin, who the author does a great job of bringing to life throughout most of the book, will play no part in the battle of Agincourt whatsoever.
Ultimately I think every reader will come to have a greater appreciation for the culture and character of all sides involved, but I don't think anyone who is familiar with the battle itself will come away with any revelations about the English victory that day. If this is your introduction to the battle, I think it certainly is a fine one, but while I don't consider myself an expert on the battle at all I felt the narrative of the battle itself relied on the fact that I already knew how fearsome the Welsh longbowmen were, and how they could rip through enemy armies with their rain of bodkin arrows. It all works out to be a bit circular, because without Agincourt how many of us would ever know just how fearsome the Welsh longbowmen were anyway?
Be smart, judge this one on its subtitle, because if you're after what Henry V did to win not just the battle but the campaign, then this is certainly the right book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews