25 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Splendid effort from Anne Curry, Agincourt explained, December 16, 2005
This review is from: Agincourt: A New History (Hardcover)
This book is evidently the product of extensive and painstaking research over what must have been a very long time. I, like many others, know about Agincourt mainly from Henry V as portrayed by Shakespeare. Anne Curry has been to extraordinary lengths to get right into the detail of events and extrapolate from the available information quite a different story. Fascinating insight into the period. Sometimes a little heavy eyelidded to keep going through some of the details but on the whole an intriguing read and well worth the effort. If accurate history is what you are looking for, told with authority, then this is a 'must have' book. Anne Curry I salute you, the hours that went into this and the efforts you have gone to are obvious, well done. Loved it, thankyou.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Analytically Deficient with a Predetermined Thesis, May 26, 2009
As noted by other reviewers, the book is a snore; however I soldiered through to the end. Again as another reviewer remarked, Juliet Barker's book is by contrast, a delightful read.
In fairness, I believe the size of Henry's army is accurate because it is based on pay records for the most part and these tend to be fairly accurate. The size of the French army is a very different story and while I don't believe the silly estimates of its size, I see nothing in the text to convince me of the accuracy of Ms. Curry's numbers. There aren't any hard and fast records of pay or remuneration for services rendered. It must also be remembered that, while the English lords signed terms of indenture, the French did no such thing. In fact, it could be argued that any fiscal records on the French side are meaningless because the Grandees of France substituted military service in lieu of taxation. Under such a system, it is impossible to ascertain the numbers engaged as the records are literary rather than fiscal.
Having walked the ground,I believe the discussion of topography as it relates to a 600 year old battlefield is misleading. Especially in an area of such intense agricultural production as Agincourt. Any discussion of the ground must be limited to distance separating the opposing armies, the distance traveled by each side to the point of contact and lastly and most important, the condition of the soil especially after a night of rain.I believe the figure three bow shots or 450 to 500 meters to be empirically more defensible than that of 1000 meters separating the armies.
The "killing of the prisoners" is, I believe at best an exaggeration and at worst a falsehood. Why didn't the Heralds object? They were after all,the "umpires" of the day. Why didn't the French exploit the propoganda value offered by this murdering in cold blood of the unarmed and defenseless. The thesis that the murders were accepted because they were deemed necessary at the time, simply does not ring true. Logistically, how long did it take and how many were killed? Were the prisoners as sheep to the slaughter? I am sure there were incidents of the killing of the unarmed, but I seriously question these actions as being pervasize throughout the English army. As to the 200 archer-murders, this number is ridiculously small when compared to the number of prisoners allegedly killed.
A book which provides a terrific perspective of not only the longbow,but military history during the Hundred Years War is "The Great Warbow" by Matthew Strickland and Robert Hardy( a Master Archer)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
A scholarly study - not for the casual reader, September 4, 2006
This review is from: Agincourt: A New History (Hardcover)
Although the book could be praised for its excrutiatingly thorough detail, I was personally disappointed. The book is more suited to a "credit class" scholarly group than the casual reader, such as I, searching simply for an entertaining understanding of the event. Despite the fact that the author includes minute detail such as pay records, important illustrations such as maps relating to the campaign and battles are not included in the text at point of discussion and lack clarity when found in the Appendix. Adding to my personal confusion was the omission of a glossary defining a multitude of terms which would be familiar only to those with a background in medieval warfare.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No