10 činjenica o bitci kod Agincourta

10 činjenica o bitci kod Agincourta


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Dana 25. listopada, također poznatog kao Dan svetog Crispina, 1415., združena engleska i velška vojska ostvarila je jednu od najznačajnijih pobjeda u povijesti kod Agincourta u sjeveroistočnoj Francuskoj.

Unatoč velikom broju, umorna, opkoljena vojska Henrika V pobijedila je cvijet francuskog plemstva, označavajući kraj ere u kojoj je vitez dominirao na bojnom polju.

Evo deset činjenica o bitci kod Agincourta:

Legenda popularne povijesti Mike Loades daje Danu detaljno opisivanje slavne pobjede Henryja V u Agincourtu 25. listopada 1415. i kako je 'bend braće' Henryja V doista bio više bandit razbojnika.

Gledajte sad

1. Prethodila je opsada Harfleura

Iako se opsada na kraju pokazala uspješnom, bila je duga i skupa za Henryjevu vojsku.

2. Francuska se vojska pozicionirala blizu Agincourta, blokirajući Henryjev put do Calaisa

Pametno manevriranje francuske vojske prisililo je Henryja i njegovu opsjednutu vojsku da se bore ako imaju ikakvu priliku doći do kuće.

3. Francuska vojska sastojala se gotovo u potpunosti od teško oklopljenih vitezova

Ti su ljudi bili ratnička elita tog vremena, opremljeni najboljim raspoloživim oružjem i oklopom.

Eleanor Janega posjećuje dvorac Hedingham kako bi istražila živote plemstva u srednjovjekovnoj Engleskoj.

Gledajte sad

4. Francuskom vojskom zapovijedao je francuski maršal Jean II Le Maingre, poznat i kao Boucicaut

Boucicaut je bio jedan od najvećih zabavljača svog vremena i vješt taktičar. Također je bio svjestan prošlih poraza koje su Francuzi pretrpjeli u rukama Engleza i u Crecyju i u Poitiersu u prošlom stoljeću i bio je odlučan izbjeći sličan ishod.

5. Henryjeva vojska sastojala se uglavnom od strijelaca

Engleski dugi luk sa samotiskivanjem. Zasluge: James Cram / Commons.

Ti su ljudi trenirali svaki tjedan i bili su visokokvalificirani profesionalni ubojice. Tome je bez sumnje pomogao engleski zakon, koji je svaku nedjelju obvezivao streljaštvo kako bi se osiguralo da kralj uvijek ima na raspolaganju stalnu opskrbu strijelaca.

6. Henry je napravio prvi korak

Henrik je svoju vojsku nastavio dalje uz polje do položaja zaštićenog šumom s obje strane u nadi da će namamiti francuske vitezove naprijed.

7. Engleski strijelci upotrijebili su izoštrene kolce kako bi ih zaštitili od konjičkih napada

Ulog je također tunelirao francuske vitezove prema Henrikovim teško naoružanim pješacima u središtu.

Strijelci su strijelcima zaštitili svoje položaje na bokovima Henryjeve vojske. Zasluge: PaulVIF / Commons.

8. Prvi val francuskih vitezova desetkovani su od strane engleskih strijelaca

Dok su vitezovi jurišali naprijed, dugim strijelcima kiša je napadala protivničke strele i desetkovala francuske redove.

Minijatura bitke kod Agincourta iz 15. stoljeća. Suprotno slici, na bojnom polju vladao je kaos i nije bilo razmjene strijelčeve vatre. Zasluge: Antoine Leduc, Sylvie Leluc i Olivier Renaudeau / Commons.

9. Henry V se borio za svoj život tijekom sukoba

Kad su se francuski vitezovi sukobili s engleskim teškim pješaštvom na vrhuncu bitke, Henrik V. bio je u najdebljem dijelu akcije.

Navodno je engleski kralj zadobio udarac sjekirom u glavu koji je srušio jedan od krunskih dragulja, a spasio ga je velški član njegove tjelohraniteljke Daffyd Gam, koji je pritom izgubio život.

10. Henry je tijekom bitke pogubio više od 3000 francuskih zarobljenika

Jedan izvor tvrdi da je Henry to učinio jer se brinuo da će zarobljenici pobjeći i ponovno se pridružiti borbama.

Jason Kingsley čitav je život bio fasciniran poviješću, posebno srednjovjekovnim razdobljem i životom vitezova. No, koliko je od onoga što vidimo i čujemo na TV -u i u filmu točno? U ovoj seriji Jason otkriva stvarnost koja stoji iza mitova.

Gledajte sad

Bitka kod Agincourta

The Bitka kod Agincourta ( / ˈ æ ʒ ɪ n k ɔːr (t), - k ʊər / [a] francuski: Azincourt [azɛ̃kuʁ]) bila je engleska pobjeda u Stogodišnjem ratu. To se dogodilo 25. listopada 1415. (dan svetog Crispina) u blizini Azincourta u sjevernoj Francuskoj. [b] Neočekivana engleska pobjeda protiv brojčano nadmoćnije francuske vojske podigla je engleski moral i ugled, osakatila Francusku i započela novo razdoblje engleske dominacije u ratu.

Nakon nekoliko desetljeća relativnog mira, Englezi su nastavili rat 1415. usred neuspjeha pregovora s Francuzima. U kampanji koja je uslijedila mnogi su vojnici umrli od bolesti, a engleski broj se smanjio pokušavajući se povući u Calais koji su držali Englezi, ali im je put blokirala znatno veća francuska vojska. Unatoč brojčanom nedostatku, bitka je završila velikom pobjedom Engleza.

Engleski kralj Henry V. poveo je svoje trupe u bitku i sudjelovao u borbama prsa u prsa. Francuski kralj Charles VI nije zapovijedao francuskom vojskom jer je bolovao od psihotičnih bolesti i povezane mentalne nesposobnosti. Francuzima je zapovijedao konztel Charles d'Albret i različiti istaknuti francuski plemići iz stranke Armagnac. Ova bitka značajna je po korištenju engleskog dugačkog luka u vrlo velikom broju, pri čemu su engleski i velški strijelci činili gotovo 80 posto Henryjeve vojske.

Agincourt je jedna od najslavnijih engleskih pobjeda i bio je jedan od najvažnijih engleskih trijumfa u Stogodišnjem ratu, zajedno s bitkom kod Crécyja (1346.) i bitkom kod Poitiersa (1356.). Ona čini središte drame Williama Shakespearea Henrik V., napisana 1599. godine.


Zašto je bitka kod Agincourta i danas važna

Nadmašen i nadmašen, kada je Henry V pobijedio u bitci kod Agincourta, to je bila slavna pobjeda u Stogodišnjem ratu između Engleza i Francuza. A sve je to bilo zbog skromnog dugog luka. Sada, na 600. godišnjicu bitke, Linda Davies objašnjava kako je njezina nova knjiga, Longbow Girl, plus dijeli neke zabavne činjenice o dugačkom luku za koje se kladimo da nikada niste znali!

Laurence Olivier u svojoj filmskoj verziji Henryja V. Fotografija: ITV/Rex/Shutterstock

Laurence Olivier u svojoj filmskoj verziji Henryja V. Fotografija: ITV/Rex/Shutterstock

Posljednja izmjena na Thu 22. veljače 2018. 14.23 GMT

Bitka kod Agincourta tijekom stoljeća plijenila je maštu mnogih književnika i bila je to jedna od inspiracija za moj roman, Duga djevojka. Zašto ima takvu moć?

Uz bitku kod Crécyja 1346. i bitku kod Poitiersa 1356., bitka kod Agincourta 1415. bila je jedna od tri legendarne pobjede Engleza protiv Francuza tijekom Stogodišnjeg rata. Ovaj dugotrajni rat bio je niz sukoba koje je Engleska od 1337. do 1453. vodila protiv Francuske dok su engleski kraljevi pokušavali osvojiti francuski teritorij i francusko prijestolje

Uoči bitke kod Agincourta, izgledalo je kao da je kralj Henry V. svoju vojsku vodio do katastrofe.

Dva mjeseca ranije, kralj je s 11.000 ljudi prešao La Manche i opsjedao Harfleur u Normandiji. Nakon pet tjedana grad se predao, ali polovica Henryjevih ljudi umrla je u borbi ili bolesti. Henry je morao pobjeći natrag u Englesku. Krenuo je sjeveroistočno u Calais gdje je namjeravao upoznati englesku flotu i otploviti kući. Ali na putu je umarširao u zamku! U Agincourtu je čekala ogromna francuska vojska od dvadeset tisuća ljudi, koja je znatno nadmašila iscrpljene engleske strijelce, vitezove i oružnike.

I nije ga čekala samo neka stara vojska. Krema francuske aristokracije okupila se kako bi Englezima nanijela ono što su mislili da će biti masakr. Velika nagrada bila je biti sam kralj Henry kojeg su htjeli zarobiti i otkupiti za cijelo bogatstvo.

Samo što nije tako išlo.

Usprkos svim izgledima, kralj Henry V pobijedio je svježu vojsku četiri puta veću od svoje, jer su, vjerojatno, snage kralja Henryja imale dugačak luk. Masivno snažni dugački lukovi bili su srednjovjekovni ekvivalent modernim strojnicama. Mogli su raniti na četiri stotine metara, ubiti na dvije stotine i probiti oklop na sto metara. Pet tisuća strijelaca, od kojih je svaki izgubio petnaest strijela u minuti, pustilo je u jednu minutu letjeti ukupno sedamdeset pet tisuća strijela: oluja sa strijelama za koju se govorilo da je blokirala svjetlost sunca. Izazvao je tisuće žrtava izravno, ali i neizravno, izluđujući francuske konje, koji su pogazili zbijene redove francuskih pješaka.

Dakle, ako se moglo reći da je jedna stvar pobijedila u "nepobjedivoj" bitci kod Agincourta, to su bili Anglo-velški strijelci. Tradicionalno, slavu pobjede oduvijek su preuzimali aristokracija, vitezovi i Men-at Arms, a ne Yeomen ili seljački strijelci. Bitke kod Crécyja, Poitiersa i Agincourta promijenile su ratni odnos snaga između plemstva i jemena ili seljaka koji su držali dugački luk. Ideja da snaga i vještina mogu pobijediti bogatstvo i status revolucionarna je.

Svidjela mi se ideja da ti skromni ljudi jednostavnim komadom drveta promijene tijek povijesti. Osobito od svoje osme godine vježbao sam sa svojim jednostavnim komadom drveta.

Linda Davies i njezin dugi luk

Tada mi je otac poklonio prvi dugački luk. Volio sam gađati mete, usavršavajući svoju vještinu. Postoji nešto vrlo visceralno u pucanju luka i slušanju udarca dok vaša strijela pogađa bikovo oko (ili zlato kako ga strijelci zovu.) Kao odrasla osoba, pucajući u moj luk, pitala sam se o mladoj djevojci, djevojci dugom luku i što bilo bi kao da je morala stvarno upotrijebiti svoje oružje, možda da bi spasila svoj život, možda da spasi život cijele svoje obitelji. I tako je počela Longbow Girl.


Engleski Longbowman: 10 stvari koje trebate znati

Iako produženo oružje dugačkog luka prethodi srednjovjekovnom Englezu za više od 3500 godina (s prvim poznatim primjerkom iz 2665. godine prije Krista), poznati dugomađar srednjeg vijeka ostavio je trag na taktičkoj strani stvari kada su u pitanju slavni vojnih susreta. I dok su Sluys (1340), Crécy (1346), Poitiers (1356) i Agincourt (1415) dokazali junaštvo engleskog dugačkog strijelca, zasigurno je bilo više toga da se bude posvećeni strijelac u vojnom svijetu kojim dominiraju teško oklopljeni vitezovi i oružnici. Stoga ćemo bez daljnjih provjera provjeriti deset zanimljivih činjenica koje biste trebali znati o engleskom longmanmanu.

1) Nisu svi engleski strijelci bili „Englezi“ -

Uobičajena zabluda o engleskom dugačkom strijelcu zapravo se odnosi na njegovu kategorizaciju kao jedinog "Engleza". Dok su taktičke sposobnosti strijelca s dugom lokom procvjetale nakon 14. stoljeća, podrijetlo ratovanja baziranog na streličarstvu u Britaniji imalo je daleko stariju tradiciju. U tu svrhu, tijekom kasnih 11. stoljeća anglo-normanskih invazija na Wales, Velšani su dobro opisali sebe u streljaštvu protiv svojih dobro oklopljenih neprijatelja.

Zanimljivo je da su Normani vjerojatno bili nadahnuti takvom taktičkom oštroumnošću domorodaca. S obzirom na njihovu sklonost prilagodljivosti, luk je uzdignut u prestižno oružje nakon Normanskog osvajanja Engleske. Praktičnost je (očito) odigrala svoju ulogu uz svečane poslove-luk je postigao svoj 'prestiž' isključivo zbog svoje čiste učinkovitosti u ruci specijaliziranih strijelaca koji su branili sjevernu Englesku od zadiranja lako oklopljenih Škota.

Kao rezultat toga, engleska vojska nastavila je zapošljavati Velšane kao predane strijelce. No, još antitetski, Englezi su u svojim redovima zapošljavali i Francuze. S povijesne strane, ovo ne bi trebalo biti previše iznenađenje. To je zato što su do 13. do 14. stoljeća engleski monarsi Plantagenet nastavili držati ogromne površine zemlje i naselja u kontinentalnoj Francuskoj. Tako su mnogi Francuzi iz ovih krajeva (poput Gaskona i Francuza-Normana) često smatrali Engleze svojim gospodarima, pa su tako bez ikakve grižnje snage služili u njihovim vojskama (uključujući i streljačke divizije).

2) "Zadržani" držači i Yeomen -

Ilustracija Graham Turner.

Prema povjesničaru Cliveu Bartlettu, engleska vojska iz 14. stoljeća, uključujući strijelce, uglavnom se sastojala od nameta i tzv. Potonja kategorija uključivala je svojevrsni ugovor između kralja i njegovih velikaša koji je monarhu omogućio da pozove čuvare plemića u svrhe ratova (osobito u prekomorskim zemljama).

Ovaj pseudo-feudalni aranžman potaknuo je klasu poluprofesionalnih vojnika koji su uglavnom bili stanovnici sa svih posjeda gospodara i kraljeva. A među tim držačima najvještiji su bili dugim majstori u kućanstvu. Strijelci iz kraljevog vlastitog domaćinstva nazvani su ‘Yeomen of the Crown’, pa su ih s pravom smatrali elitom čak i među iskusnim strijelcima.

Ostali su zadržavači dolazili iz četvrti velikih posjeda, obično se sastojali od sljedbenika (ako ne i stanovnika) gospodovog domaćinstva. Zanimljivo je da su mnogi od njih služili istoj svrsi i primali slične beneficije poput držača za kućanstvo. Postojala je i treća kategorija strijelaca sa strijelcima, a ta se skupina odnosila na muškarce koji su bili angažirani za određene vojne dužnosti, uključujući garnizoniranje i obranu "prekomorskih" francuskih gradova. Nažalost, unatoč svom profesionalnom statusu, ti su se unajmljeni službenici često okretali banditizmu, jer službena plaćanja nisu uvijek dostavljana na vrijeme.

3) Monetarna pitanja i pljačka -

Čudno je da su početkom 14. stoljeća i strijelcima i stražarima plaćeni isti iznos (od 3 penija dnevno) i u Engleskoj i u Francuskoj - unatoč njihovoj pretpostavljenoj razlici u razini vještina. Međutim, do 15. stoljeća došlo je do mnogih promjena u vojnim zakonima, a značajna se odnosi na to kako su povišeni nameti mogli poslužiti samo na "domaćim" arenama, poput Engleske i (u nekim slučajevima) Škotske.

S druge strane, zadržavajuće grupe engleskih longmanmana zadržale su teret borbi u ‘prekomorskoj’ Francuskoj, dajući im tako profesionalni karakter. Njihova poboljšana ljestvica plaća također je odražavala takvu promjenu, pa je nova cifra iznosila 6 penija dnevno-dodajući oko 9 funti godišnje. U praktičnom smislu, broj se zapravo smanjio na oko 5 funti godišnje, a usporedbe radi, srednjovjekovnom vitezu je bilo potrebno oko 40 funti godišnje kako bi uzdržavao sebe i svoju djecu.

Naravno, postavlja se pitanje - zašto su strijelci sa strijelcima pristali na svoje ‘ugovore na neodređeno vrijeme’ unatoč tako niskim plaćama? Pa, kao u slučaju Mongola, novčana korist nije dolazila od plaće, već iz raznih ‘pogodnosti’. Na primjer, neki su vlasnici domaćinstava plaćali godišnje rente od strane svojih gospodara, a ti su iznosi često bili dvocifreni. Drugi su bili darovite kuće i novčani bonusi.

I na kraju, postojala je vjekovna privlačnost prema pljački i otkupninama. Što se tiče potonjeg, ratni zarobljenici visokog ranga odmah su predani kapetanu, a posljedično je dugom strijelcu isplaćena zdrava nagrada. Dok je u slučajevima žrtava niskog ranga otmičar mogao izravno zahtijevati njegovu otkupninu. Dobiveni novac (ako je plaćen) tada je raspodijeljen u skladu s nekim postavljenim pravilima. Dvije trećine iznosa mogao je uzeti otmičar (strijelac), dok je preostalu trećinu podijelio kapetan, njegov nadređeni zapovjednik i na kraju kralj.

4) Osposobljavanje (ili njegovo nedostajanje) -

Ilustracija Graham Turner.

Obuka posebno za ratovanje i taktiku ratišta, ili barem ono što mi razumijemo kao rigorozna obuka za ratovanje (poznat i kao boot camp), znatno je izostala iz itinerera engleskog strijelca. Pa zašto se smatralo da je dugački strijelac moćan, osobito u drugoj polovici 14. stoljeća? Pa, odgovor leži u njihovoj razini vještine, a ne u fizičkoj sposobnosti za bitke.

Jednostavno rečeno, postojala je tradicija streličarstva i među osobama koje su držale kaznu i nametnutim ljudima, a vještine su se prenosile s generacije na generaciju. Dakle, iako većina njih nije trenirala posebno za scenarije bitke, vježbali su svoje vještine streličarstva u rekreacijskim i lovačkim aktivnostima. Zapravo, neki su engleski monarhi iskoristili tu 'ekskluzivnost' streličarskih vještina zasnovanih na dugim lukovima, što je njihovoj vojsci dalo prednost nad ostalim suvremenim europskim snagama (koje se obično sastoje od samostreličara)-toliko da su doneseni brojni statuti koji su obvezivali mnoge držače da vježbaju svoje streljaštvo nedjeljom.

Bilo je i redovitih uputa s kraljevskog dvora koje su svesrdno poticale ljude da se bave streličarstvom. Kao što deklaracija kralja Edwarda III iz 1363. jasno pokazuje (kako se navodi u Engleski Longbowman: 1330 - 1515 autor Clive Bartlett)

Dok su ljudi u našem carstvu, bogati i siromašni, ranije u svojim igrama bili naviknuti baviti se streličarstvom - odakle je uz Božju pomoć dobro poznato da su velika čast i profit došli do našeg područja, a nemala prednost za nas same u našem ratobornom svijetu poduzeća ... da će svaki čovjek u istoj zemlji, ako je sposoban, tijekom praznika koristiti u svojim igrama lukove i strijele ... i tako učiti i vježbati streličarstvo.

Međutim, valja napomenuti da se do sredine 15. stoljeća strijelci nisu smatrali tako smrtonosnima kao prije nekoliko desetljeća. Suvremeni kroničar Philip de Commynes govorio je o tome kako Englezi u vojsci Karla Hrabrog nisu bili dostojni stvarnih manevara na bojnom polju. Za razliku od sve nižih standarda strijelaca, vojvoda od Burgundije je možda također obučio te ljude u gađanju u kombinaciji s kopljašima, nagovještavajući tako preteču formacija štuka i hitac.

5) Oklop i oružje isporučeno „ugovorom“ -

Za razliku od loše opremljenog europskog strijelca iz ranog srednjeg vijeka, strijelac je bio opremljen oklopom i oružjem koje mu je osigurao poslodavac (gospodar ili kralj). Prema knjizi računovodstva za kućanstvo iz 1480. godine, tipični engleski strijelac bio je zaštićen brigandinom - koji je bio vrsta platnenog (ili kožnog) oklopa ojačanog malim čeličnim pločama zakovanim za tkaninu.

Izdan mu je i par udlaga za obranu ruku, 'sallet' (ratna kaciga ili čelično ojačana kapa), 'standart' (ili 'standard' koji mu je štitio vrat), 'jakna' (u osnovi livreja), "gusset" (koji je mogao biti ili sintetičko donje rublje ili mali tanjur koji mu je štitio zglobove) i snop strelica. Vjerojatno se mnoga takva oprema držala na zalihama, a izdavali su je samo stariji zapovjednici samo u vrijeme rata.

6) Stvarni dugi luk -

Suprotno nekim shvaćanjima, dugačak luk nije bila jedina vrsta luka koju su engleski strijelci koristili nakon 14. stoljeća. Zapravo, većina strijelaca koristila je svoje osobne lukove za lov i povremene vježbe. No, nakon što su zadržani (ili naplaćeni), muškarci su opskrbljeni novijim ratnim lukovima prema gore spomenutom ugovornom sustavu (ili državi). Ti su se novi dugački lukovi manje-više odnosili na standardno izdanje, pa je njihovom masovnom proizvodnjom postalo lakše upravljati.

Sada dugačak luk zapravo nije bio najučinkovitije oružje na temelju projektila svog vremena. Međutim, dizajn je nadomjestio poteškoće u korištenju na druge načine - poput relativne jeftinoće i jednostavnosti u usporedbi s samostrelom. Nadalje, dugačak luk u ruci iskusnog strijelca imao je veliki udarac sa sposobnošću da čak i probije (rani period) čelični oklop na znatnu udaljenost. To je ono što je Gerald od Walesa, kambro-normanski arhiđakon i povjesničar 12. stoljeća, rekao o velškom dugom luku (preteči "engleske" sorte), iz izvora Engleski Longbowman: 1330 - 1515 (napisao Clive Bartlett)

… [U] ratu protiv Velšana, jedan od oružnika je pogođen strijelom koju je u njega uputio Velšanin. Prošao mu je ravno kroz bedro, visoko gore, gdje su ga izvana i izvan noge štitili njegovi željezni kostimi, a zatim je kroz suknju njegove kožne tunike pored probio onaj dio sedla koji se naziva alva ili sjedalo i na kraju zaglavio se u njegovu konju, vozeći tako duboko da je ubio životinju.

7) Dizajn i raspon dugačkog luka -

Za razliku od kompozitnih lukova, dugački luk koji se koristio za ratove obično se izrađivao od jednog komada drveta, aludirajući na jednostavnost njegova dizajna. U tom smislu, preferirano drvo oduvijek je bilo sorte tise, iako su sezonske promjene i dostupnost uvjetovali upotrebu i drugih vrsta drva - poput jasena i brijesta. U tu je svrhu masovnu proizvodnju dugih lukova prilično regulirala država (i gospodari), a namjenske plantaže drveća posebno su opskrbljivale mnoge potrebne štapove.

Bilo je i trenutaka kada je Engleska morala uvoziti pramčane štapove od tise iz kontinentalnih europskih područja, naime Venecije i drugih talijanskih država. U svakom slučaju, većinu pramčanih palica često su ocjenjivali i sortirali po kvaliteti posebno imenovani dužnosnici, dok su dugački luk sami po sebi mogli iz prve klade postaviti majstori za manje od dva sata, čime je potaknuta impresivna stopa proizvodnje .

Povjesničar Clive Bartlett govorio je o tome kako je gotovi dugačak luk (često oslikan, a ponekad i 'pobijeljen') bio veći od 6 stopa (6 stopa 2 inča), iako su otkriveni čak i duži primjerci (do 6 stopa 11 inča) slavni ratni brod Kraljevske mornarice iz 16. stoljeća Mary Rose. Sada u smislu optimiziranog oblika, članovi (udovi) luka trebali bi se odnositi na okrugli oblik "D". Taj opseg tjelesnosti preveo je na oko 80-120 funti težine ždrijeba, iako su u borbama korištene veće težine do 185 funti-zbog čega su duljine izvlačenja prelazile 30 inča.

I na kraju, kad je riječ o rasponu, nema posebnih suvremenih izvora koji točno prikazuju figure u srednjem vijeku. Međutim moderne rekonstrukcije (čak i Mary Rose primjerci) dovoljno su dokazali da bi dugačke lukove mogle doseći negdje između 250-330 m (ili 273 do 361 jardi). Svi ti čimbenici sile i dometa, kad su kombinirani, bili su dovoljni da prodru u oklop Damaska, iako su oklopi na ploči još uvijek bili relativno neoštećeni. No, također treba napomenuti da bi strijele 'bodkin' koje je ispalio dugački strijelac potencijalno mogle objasniti tupu traumu na jako oklopljenim konjanicima (poput vitezova) budući da su ti jahači već posjedovali dodatni zamah svojih ratnih konja u galopu.

8) Narukvice za sigurnost -

Prošireni opseg dugačkog luka zajedno s napetom prirodom žice (obično izrađene od konoplje) zasigurno su pretvorile letjelicu u opasno oružje za rukovanje. Glavnu opasnost za korisnika predstavljalo je to što je žica udarila u područje podlaktice u njezinom ‘zaletu’. To se moglo izbjeći savijanjem lakta ili podešavanjem udaljenosti između žice i pramca pri natezanju - no obje su ove mjere otežavale unutarnje streljano i tehniku ​​strijelca.

Stoga se kao rješenje dugi strijelac odlučio za narukvice (oklop podlaktice) izrađene od kože i roga (pa čak i od morževe 'slonove kosti' u rjeđim prilikama). Općenito izlaže sustav remena i kopče, što dokazuju postojeći primjerci spašeni iz Mary Rose, narukvice su također nosile neki oblik obilježja. Ovi su heraldički uređaji vjerojatno prikazivali podrijetlo strijelca iz grada ili gospodsku značku pod čijim je zapovjedništvom služio strijelac.

9) "Harbingers" -

'Predslanik' se po definiciji odnosi na prethodnika ili vjesnika koji najavljuje ili signalizira približavanje drugoga. Međutim, u praktičnom smislu, engleski "Harbingeri" iz srednjeg vijeka služili su malo drugačijem cilju. Priključeni u logistički zbor vojske, imali su zadatak pronaći tragove običnih vojnika i strijelaca prije dolaska glavnine trupa.

Ove gredice bile su prilično dobro raspoređene na engleskom tlu, s time da su prostorije dodijeljene u skladu s činom i utjecajem vojnika, iako je u Francuskoj metoda ponekad ustupila mjesto ludilu-s kaotičnim poslovima i snažnim naoružanjem koji su odlučivali o opsegu dobrog stanovanja. Zanimljivo je da su Harbingeri (ponekad u svojim redovima imali odjele za strijelce) također služili kao izviđači koji su tražili suha mjesta pogodna za kampiranje koja su imala pristup bitnim zahtjevima poput drva i vode.

10) Bitka kod Agincourta - pobjeda nad ogromnim izgledima

Na mnogo načina, ovaj poznati angažman iz Stogodišnjeg rata pokazao je superiornost taktike, topografije i discipliniranih strijelaca nad samo teškim oklopom - čimbenicima koji su očito bili rijetki tijekom prvih desetljeća 15. stoljeća.

Što se tiče same bitke, u njoj je bilo između 6.000 i 9.000 engleskih vojnika (od kojih je 5/6 od njih strijelaca) protiv 20.000 do 30.000 francuskih snaga, koje su imale oko 10.000 teških oklopljenih vitezova i oružnika. Oholo razmišljanje francuskog plemstva koje je sudjelovalo u bitci moglo bi se donekle prikupiti iz izjave kroničara Edmonda de Dyntnera - "deset francuskih plemića protiv jednog Engleza", koja je potpuno odbacila "vojnu vrijednost" jednog strijelca iz engleske vojske.

Što se tiče taktičkog postavljanja, engleska vojska kojom je zapovijedao Henrik V, engleski kralj, smjestila se na kraj nedavno orane zemlje, a bokovi su im bili prekriveni gustim šumama (što je praktički gotovo onemogućilo bočne konjičke napade). Prednji dijelovi strijelaca također su bili zaštićeni šiljatim drvenim bokovima i oplatama koje bi obeshrabrile frontalne konjičke napade.

No u svemu tome teren se pokazao najvećom preprekom za oklopnu francusku vojsku, budući da je polje već bilo blatnjavo zbog nedavnih pojava jake kiše. U zamahu ironije, oklopna težina francuskih vitezova (barem za neke od njih) postala je njihov najveći nedostatak, a masa nabijenih vojnika petljala je i kiksala po nakvašenom krajoliku-što ih je činilo lakim odabirom za dobro obučene strelce .

A kad su vitezovi konačno stigli do engleskih linija, bili su potpuno iscrpljeni, ali i nisu imali prostora za učinkovito rukovanje svojim teškim oružjem. Engleski dugački strijelci i oružnici još uvijek okretnih nogu, prešli su na čekiće i čekiće te su zadali snažan udarac u borbi prsa u prsa po iskrzljanim Francuzima. Na kraju se procjenjuje da je ubijeno oko 7000 do 10.000 francuskih vojnika (među njima je bilo i oko tisuću viših plemića). Još je više zarobljeno, dok su se engleski gubici kretali oko bijednih 400.

Počasno priznanje - Plač ‘pustošenja’

Dok je Williama Shakespearea Julije Cezar proslavio izraz, krik ‘pustošenja’ zapravo je bio poziv koji su u srednjem vijeku koristile engleska (i anglo-francuska) vojska kako bi označile početak pljačke. U biti, 'pustoš' (ili havok, izvedeno iz starofrancuskog havot, što znači pljačkanje) najavljivao kraj pobjedničke bitke, pa su zapovjednici ratnu vapaj shvatili prilično ozbiljno. Zapravo, to je shvaćeno toliko ozbiljno da je čak i preuranjeni poziv 'pustoš' tijekom bitke često rezultirao smrtnom kaznom (odrubljivanjem glave) za one koji su započeli plač.

Iako se ovo može činiti oštrim, takve rigorozne kazne bile su dio vojnih propisa s kraja 14. stoljeća. Mnogi od njih formulirani su zbog 'praktičnosti' ugradnje discipline u vojsku - kvalitete koja je često odlučivala o ishodu bitke u konkretnom slučaju koji se odnosi na bitku kod Agincourta. Nadalje, za razliku od tada bučnih francuskih plemića, Englezi su poduzeli kolektivne mjere opreza za svoju relativno manju vojsku, čime su podržali načela sigurnosti. Dakle, u biti, preuranjeni pozivatelji s 'pustošom' mogli su se suprotstaviti takvim načelima, što je moglo dovesti cijelu vojsku u opasnost pri pljački u njihovom nečuvanom 'načinu'.

Reference knjiga: Engleski Longbowman: 1330 - 1515 (napisao Clive Bartlett) / Longbowmen, Tactics, and Terrain: Three Battle Narratives iz Stogodišnjeg rata (Moly Helen Donohue)


Žandarmi i bitka kod Agincourta

Jedna neobična činjenica istaknuta u ovoj 600. godišnjici je povijest žandarmerije. Naići ćete na žandare u njihovim prepoznatljivim plavim odorama i šeširima ako se vozite kroz Francusku, oni su ti koji nadziru ceste i ruralna područja. Ali oni su, začudo, grana vojske, a ne civilne policije.

Žandarmerija je započela kao kraljevski oružnik, Maréchaussée de France, izvorno zamišljen kao vojna policija, koja drži vojnike pod kontrolom i zaustavlja ih u pljački nakon bitaka.

Borili su se u bitci kod Agincourta pod svojim zapovjednikom, Prévôt des Maréchaux (namjesnik maršala), Galloisom de Fougièresom. Kad je imao 60 godina kad se borio i umro u Agincourtu, otišao je iz svoje domovine Berry u križarski rat 1396. godine, zatim u Italiju 1410. Smatra se prvim žandarom ubijenim u borbi, njegov je kostur otkriven u obližnjoj crkvi Auchy. -lès-Hesdin zajedno s drugim vitezovima tog vremena uključujući i admirala Francuske. Njegov kostur odnesen je u Versailles i pokopan ispod spomenika žandarmeriji u Versaillesu.


Agincourt: što se doista dogodilo

Agincourt je legendaran kao jedan od najboljih trenutaka u Engleskoj, ali povjesničarka Anne Curry kaže da činjenice ne potvrđuju naše ružičasto viđenje ove pobjede - a ponašanje Henrika V. možda nije bilo tako plemenito kao što kronike ukazuju

Ovo natjecanje je sada zatvoreno

Objavljeno: 6. studenog 2019. u 18:05

Agincourt, slavna pobjeda Henrika V nad Francuzima 25. listopada 1415., fascinantna je bitka ne samo zbog onoga što se dogodilo, već i zbog toga kako se njegov mit od tada razvijao. Ponovni izum Tjudora, koji je doveo do suštinskog Shakespeareovog prikaza "nas nekoliko sretnih", bio je najutjecajniji, ali svako je stoljeće stjecalo svoje priraste.

Ubrzo nakon bitke kod Monsa u Prvom svjetskom ratu 1914., na primjer, jedan je novinar stvorio priču da su se anđeoski engleski strijelci, duhovi strijelaca Agincourta, pojavili na nebu kako bi pomogli Britancima. Ovo stvaranje mitova vraća nas cijeli krug u samo razdoblje jer nekoliko engleskih kronika govori o tome kako je sveti George viđen u borbi za Henryjevu vojsku. U potrazi za objašnjenjima danas, međutim, povjesničar mora biti oprezniji i primijeniti metode detektiva. Prvi zadatak je pronaći što više dokaza, drugi ih kritički procijeniti u potrazi za istinom. Baš kao i detektiv, povjesničar se mora čuvati sumnjivih svjedočenja i tražiti čvrste dokaze. Istraživanja koja sam proveo tijekom posljednjeg desetljeća ukazuju na to da se uobičajene pretpostavke o Agincourtu jednostavno ne mogu potkrijepiti.

Detektivi imaju sreću što mogu intervjuirati one koji su uključeni u događaj. Povjesničar se mora zadovoljiti iskazima očevidaca zapisanim u godinama nakon bitke. Svi izazivaju probleme. John Hardyng je tvrdio da je bio u kampanji, ali su izvještaji koje je naveo u svojim stihovnim kronikama 40 godina kasnije površni, a kapetan za kojeg je tvrdio da je služio bio je u Berwick-upon-Tweedu tijekom kampanje. Hardyng je stoga i sam bio rani tvorac mita o Agincourtu.

Anonimni Gesta Henrici Quinti (djela Henrika V), koje je napisao svećenik s Henryjevom vojskom, najraniji je očevidac i pun je zanimljivih detalja. It is not unbiased, however, since it was written as a eulogy of the king, using the battle as manifestation of God’s approval for Henry. The killing of the prisoners, missing from many English accounts, is consciously constructed in the Gesta not to implicate the king at all: “But then, all at once, because of what wrathfulness on God’s part no one knows, a shout went up that the enemy’s mounted rearguard were re-establishing their position … and immediately … the prisoners … were killed by the swords either of their captors or of others following after”.

The Flemish chronicler, Jean de Waurin, tells us that he was 15 years old and with the French army at the battle. He says that he gained information from Jean Le Fèvre, king-of-arms of Duke Philip of Burgundy’s chivalric order of the Golden Fleece, who was “at the time of the battle 19 years old and in the company of the king of England in all the business of this time”. Although their texts are fascinating, they are almost identical with each other and with the well known chronicle of Enguerran de Monstrelet, another writer of Burgundian allegiance. All wrote many years afterwards, and hindsight can be a very dangerous thing in battle narratives.

A final eyewitness was Sir Guillebert de Lannoy who wrote an account of his own experiences in the battle. This is short but useful because he had been captured by the time Henry issued the order to kill the prisoners. Wounded in the knee and in the head, he tells that he was lying on the ground with the dead at the time the fighting stopped and the English came to search through the heaps. He was pulled out and taken to a nearby house with 10 to 12 other wounded prisoners. When the order came that each man should kill his prisoners, which Lannoy claims was occasioned by the arrival of Anthony, Duke of Brabant at the battle, the house was set on fire but he escaped, only to be recaptured and taken to England.

Examining the evidence

Other French writers, however, ascribe the responsibility for occasioning Henry’s murderous order to different French lords. This reminds us of a fundamental truth about the chronicles. All the accounts of battle were partisan. For the French, Agincourt was such a disaster that someone had to be to blame, but exactly who depended on the writer’s political affiliations. Their accounts were highly politicised in the context of on-going tension between Burgundian and Armagnac factions.

To cite but one example: Monstrelet, Waurin and Le Fèvre deliberately included the story that Duke Philip, at the time Count of Charolais, had “desired with his whole heart to be at the battle to fight the English” but that his father Duke John of Burgundy had instructed his governors to keep him in the castle of Aire near Ghent “as securely and secretly as they could so that he could not hear any news nor discover the intended day of the battle”. In this way, Duke Philip’s lifelong embarrassment at his absence could be explained away Duke John was no longer alive to contradict.

Although the eyewitness accounts and the narratives in other chronicles are important in reconstructing the battle, we cannot simply accept what they say at face value any more than detectives should believe what witnesses and suspects tell them. In a desire to tell a good story, many modern writers on Agincourt have fallen into the trap of taking the best bits from each chronicle and stringing them together to produce a seamless narrative. Like a detective, a historian needs to compare the conflicting testimonies to establish possible scenarios. Other kinds of evidence need to be found which do not suffer from the subjectivity of the chroniclers.

We are fortunate to have the field itself to analyse as the scene of crime, but even more to have large quantities of administrative records. Urban records for the towns of northern France, for instance, can help us to be certain of the routes of the armies and on military preparations. But the sources which really enable us to make a breakthrough are the financial records produced by the English and French crowns because these provide totally reliable evidence on the crucial question of army sizes and even provide us with the names of individual soldiers. By this period, all soldiers were paid. Evidence for their service is therefore revealed in the records of the English Exchequer housed in the National Archives at Kew, and of the French chambre des comptes, to be found in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris and various regional archives.

Analysing all of this evidence and putting it together with a critical, comparative study of the chronicles, what conclusions can we come to? Thanks to a document concerning the raising of taxes to pay the army, we have clear indication of the size of force that the French were proposing to raise – 6,000 men-at-arms and 3,000 archers. From the musters and payments we can trace the assembly of this army to the middle of September, although not early enough to rescue Harfleur from Henry.

This was the army which harried Henry’s march northwards from Harfleur and for which the French battle plan found in the British Library was devised. The French undoubtedly intended to bring Henry to battle either at the Somme or near Péronne but he moved his army away from any possible interaction. Once he had succeeding in crossing the Somme, the French had to act quickly if they were to intercept him before he reached Calais. Heralds were sent to him on 20 October challenging him to battle. It is possible that the chosen location was Aubigny just to the west of Arras. Henry initially moved in that direction but then turned towards the coast in the hope of eluding his enemy once more.

This meant that the French, hoping to be reinforced by the men of Picardy and the lands of the north-eastern frontier such as Bar and Brabant, now had to communicate the change of location. There is strong evidence that by the morning of 25 October not all of the additional troops had arrived at Agincourt. The Duke of Brabant certainly arrived late in the day, the Duke of Brittany only reached as far as Amiens. The Duke of Orleans may only have arrived on 24 October.

Furthermore, the decision that he should be present and should lead the army was also made late in the day at Rouen, when the King and Dauphin, fearful of the English threat and mindful of the disaster of Poitiers over 50 years earlier, were advised not to risk their presence in battle. Initially, because of concerns about the continuing quarrel between Orleans as leader of the Armagnac party and Duke John of Burgundy, both dukes were told to send troops but not to come in person. Although some troops had joined with the initial 9,000, the French army at Agincourt cannot have numbered more than 12,000. Virtually all the chroniclers tell us that the French delayed giving battle for as long as possible on the day in the hope that the missing troops would arrive in time.

The numbers game

What then of Henry’s army? We can easily trace the size of the army with which he left England. The Exchequer records show that he had entered into contracts with 320 men to provide troops. Adding in the 500 archers each from Lancashire and South Wales (North Wales was still seen as uncertain in loyalty in the aftermath of Glyn Dwr’s revolt), and likely 650 from Cheshire, we have an army of 11,850 or so. To this we can add men who indented but for whom no full record survives, as well as the carpenters, miners etc, although interestingly, the gunners were all recruited from the continent, suggesting that the English had lagged behind in the supposed “artillery revolution”.

Since those who provided troops submitted accounts to the Exchequer after the campaign with details of what had happened to their men, we can track how many died at Harfleur, how many were invalided home with dysentery, and how many were placed in garrison. The gunners, for instance, were left in Harfleur, proof that Henry did not intend to attempt any further conquests. Taking this evidence together, the army on the march and hence at the battle was around 9,000 strong.

The real contrast between the armies was their composition rather than their size. Of the 12,000 French, around 75 per cent were men-at-arms. The corresponding proportion for the English was 20 per cent, much as it had been at the start of the campaign. Knowledge that the English had such a small number of men-at-arms heartened the French and led to their placing more troops in the vanguard in anticipation of winning the day with a huge first clash. Ignorance, or a lack of understanding of the strength of the English archers, made them underestimate the danger that the latter posed.

At over 7,000, and defended by stakes and by the lie of the land, there were too many to knock out by a cavalry charge. The French do not seem to have deployed their own archers and crossbowmen in counter-actions even though we can show from pay records that such troops had been raised. As a result, the vanguard had little choice but to keep marching into the barrage of arrow fire, an experience for which there could be no prior training. Most were killed or wounded in the melee when they were already helpless, many by a swift dagger in the neck. Their fate dissuaded other French troops from entering the fray. Agincourt was therefore characterised by accusations of cowardice and treason as well as exceptionally high mortality rates for the French along with equally low rates for the English.

Slaughter of the nobles

It is doubtful that the French death rates would have been so high had it not been for King Henry’s panic after he had stood his army down. Whether the threat of French regrouping was real or not – and there is no evidence at all that any attack was ever made – Henry’s response was to slaughter soldiers who had already surrendered.

In the words of the chronicler Peter Basset, who himself served in later English campaigns, “that was the reason so many nobles were killed”. The number of prisoners who can be identified from the English royal records – since the crown had a right to a share in ransoms – is much smaller than the chroniclers claim. Henry’s reaction was symptomatic of his behaviour in the campaign as a whole. Whilst there is evidence of military skill, for instance in protecting the archers, overall he displayed a lack of confidence because he was afraid of failure. That was why he had avoided engagement until the French finally forced his hand.

It was Agincourt which transformed him and his kingship. He had invaded in 1415 as the son of a usurper and with his own title insecure. There was even a plot to depose him on 1 August, the very day he had chosen for embarkation from Southampton. He returned with confidence as God’s chosen king and warrior. No one could now challenge his royal title or his obsession with France. The English entered one of the most heavily taxed periods in their entire history as well as one of the most militarily demanding. In France, the Armagnacs were sullied by the defeat since their commanders had been captured, whilst the leading Burgundians had died a martyr’s death.

Anne Curry is the author of Agincourt: A New History (Tempus Publishing, 2005). This provides a narrative of the whole campaign and discussion of the battle. She has also written The Battle of Agincourt: Sources and Interpretations (Boydell, 2000). This includes translations and discussions of the chronicles and literary sources as well as of the administrative records.

Agincourt: a timeline

1259: Treaty of Paris. Henry III (king of England 1216–72) gives up his claim to Normandy, Anjou and Maine and pays homage as Duke of Aquitaine to Louis IX.

1328: Death of King Charles IV. His cousin is crowned as Philip VI despite the claim of Edward III (king of England 1327–77) as the son of Charles’ sister, Isabella.

1337: Philip confiscates Edward’s lands in Aquitaine. The Hundred Years War begins. Three years later, Edward formally declares himself king of France.

1346: Edward invades Normandy and defeats the French at Crécy, subsequently taking Calais after a long siege.

1356: Edward, Prince of Wales, defeats the French at Poitiers and captures John II.

1360: The treaty of Brétigny gives Edward III full sovereignty in Aquitaine, Calais and Ponthieu in return for dropping the claim to the throne and releasing John II.

1369: Charles V restarts the war. Edward III reassumes the title King of France, and it is retained by his successor, Richard II (king of England 1377–99).

1399: Richard deposed by Henry IV (king of England 1399–1413). Over the next decade, civil war develops in France between the Armagnacs and Burgundians.

1415: Henry V (king of England 1413–22) launches the biggest invasion of France since 1359. Agincourt takes place on 25 October. Two years later he begins a systematic conquest of the whole of Normandy.

1419: John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, is assassinated by the Armagnacs, led by the Dauphin Charles in Paris.

1420: In the treaty of Troyes Henry V is recognised as heir to Charles VI, and a few days later marries Charles’s daughter Catherine. Henry dies a few weeks before his father-in-law in 1422.

1431: Henry VI (king of England 1422–61) is crowned king of France.

1450: The English are driven out of Normandy, and three years later, Aquitaine. Only Calais remains in English hands.


  • Henry V was a proud i ambitious king, who had big ideas for his country.
  • Henry V was considered a strong leader who gave his army great confidence in battle. ’s play Henrik V. is one of the writer’s best known plays and has helped Henry V remain one of the most famous of our English Kings.
  • Shakespeare portrays him as a King very predan to his people and country.
  • In one of Henry’s most famous speeches in the play he says “Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more” which shows Henry V considered himself very much an equal with both his nobles and soldiers.
  • Shakespeare’s play, Henrik V., mentions the Bitka kod Agincourta a great deal.
  • Henry V was the second English monarch (king or queen) to come from the House of Lancaster.
  • Henry V was born in Monmouth in Wales and for that reason was sometimes called Henry of Monmouth.
  • During Henry V’s coronation ceremony (where he was crowned king) a terrible snowstorm occurred. Apparently the King’s people couldn’t decide whether this was a good or bad sign!
  • During Henry V’s first battle – the Battle of Shrewsbury – the young prince was hit in the face by an arrow.
  • On the 25 October 1415, Henry V famously won the Battle of Agincourt. It was the most important battle of the Hundred Years War that took place between England and France between 1337 and 1453.

Henry V was famous as a ‘warrior’ King. He proved himself a brave soldier and despite his short reign, succeeded in making England one of the strongest kingdoms in Europe.

He was perhaps a natural as he fought his first battle as a teenager! Henry V was only 14 when he fought with his father at the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403.

Henry then went on to command the English army against the Welsh rebels who were led by Owen Glendower and between 1403 and 1408, the young Prince Henry, along with his English army, won a number of victories over the rebels.

Henry was obviously a strong-minded boy. During his teens, he had many disagreements with his father, Henry IV, as the young prince was determined to increase the power of the English throne.

As soon as he became King himself, he put his plans and ambitions into action. Henry V had only been King for two years when he began to set his sights on France.

In 1415, determined to reclaim the French crown, Henry and his army set sail to France. But England were the underdogs. The English had about 8,000 knights, archers and soldiers – the French had about 30,000. To make matters worse, the English army had little food, many felt ill, some had never been to battle and they had marched about 350 kilometres. But the English army secured themselves a good position – with a forest on either side of them and against all odds they won the Battle of Agincourt on 25 October 1415. During the battle around 6,000 French soldiers were killed, and one third of the French nobility was either killed or captured.

Henry V carried on his war with France and conquered even more land. Konačno, in 1420, the King of France, Charles VI, signed the Treaty of Troyes, which recognised Henry V as heir to the throne of France.

Henry V also then married Catherine, the daughter of the King of France, securing his position even further. Unfortunately he died just two years later aged only 35, just weeks before he would have become King of France!

But the fact that Henry V died early, at a time when he was very much in charge, meant he would be remembered well.


10 Facts About the Battle of Agincourt - History

T he English victory at the Battle of Agincourt gave birth to a legend that was immortalized in William Shakespeare's King Henry V. The battle took place in a muddy farmer's field in northern France on October 25, 1415 and was one in a series of encounters between France and England that has become known as the Hundred Years' War (1337-1453).

The story begins two months before the battle. Henry and his army had landed in France on August 14 near the mouth of the Seine River. The objective was to regain English territory lost to France over a period of centuries. The first task was to besiege and conquer a nearby town. Henry was successful, but the time-consuming effort took over a month. It was now early October. Henry realized that his reduced force and the limited time left in the campaigning season, meant that he would not be able to press his attack on the French. Instead, he lead his army north in a "show of force" that would end at the English port of Calais and embarkation back to England.

Henry V at the time of the
battle. His haircut provides
a more comfortable fit
for his battle helmet.
As the English army marched north, it was dogged by a French force intent on bringing Henry to battle. The French were able to slip ahead of Henry and block his path to the sea at Agincourt. On the morning of October 25, the two armies faced one another on a recently plowed field muddied by an overnight rain and constricted by woodlands on either side. The majority of Henry's army was made up of archers the remainder consisted of armored knights who fought on foot. His opponent's force consisted primarily of knights who fought on foot and on horseback, supported by archers. Although estimates of the relative strength of the two armies vary, there is no argument that the English were vastly outnumbered.

The two enemies faced one another, exchanging taunts designed to provoke an attack. Henry marched his force close enough to allow his archers to unleash a hail of arrows upon the French. The French knights charged forward only to be caught in a slippery quagmire of mud. To make matters worse, the French attackers were unable to effectively swing their broadswords because of the tight quarters of the battlefield and the continuing forward rush of their comrades behind them. Henry's archers fired lethal storms of arrows into this dense mass of humanity until the French began to retreat. The archers then dropped their bows, picked up what weapons they could find and joined the English knights in slaying their foe. The setting sun left a battlefield heaped with the bodies of thousands of French knights and the cream of France's ruling class. The English had dealt their enemy a disastrous blow.

". their horses stumbled among the stakes, and they were speedily slain by the archers."

Jehan de Wavrin was the son of a Flemish knight. His father and older brother fought with the French at the battle. Both were killed. The young de Wavrin observed the battle from the French lines and we join his account as the two armies prepare for combat:

. The French had arranged their battalions between two small thickets, one lying close to Agincourt, and the other to Tramecourt. The place was narrow, and very advantageous for the English, and, on the contrary, very ruinous for the French, for the said French had been all night on horseback, and it rained, and the pages, grooms, and others, in leading about the horses, had broken up the ground, which was so soft that the horses could with difficulty step out of the soil. And also the said French were so loaded with armour that they could not support themselves or move forward. In the first place they were armed with long coats of steel, reaching to the knees or lower, and very heavy, over the leg harness, and besides plate armour also most of them had hooded helmets wherefore this weight of armour, with the softness of the wet ground, as has been said, kept them as if immovable, so that they could raise their dubs only with great difficulty, and with all these mischiefs there was this, that most of them were troubled with hunger and want of sleep.

. Now let us return to the English. After the parley between the two armies was finished and the delegates had returned, each to their own people, the King of England, who had appointed a knight called Sir Thomas Erpingham to place his archers in front in two wings, trusted entirely to him, and Sir Thomas, to do his part, exhorted every one to do well in the name of the King, begging them to fight vigorously against the French in order to secure and save their own lives. And thus the knight, who rode with two others only in front of the battalion, seeing that the hour was come, for all things were well arranged, threw up a baton which he held in his hand, saying 'Nestrocq' ['Now strike'] which was the signal for attack then dismounted and joined the King, who was also on foot in the midst of his men, with his banner before him.

A contemporary depiction of the battle.
Agincourt stands in the background.
Then the English, seeing this signal, began suddenly to march, uttering a very loud cry, which greatly surprised the French. And when the English saw that the French did not approach them, they marched dashingly towards them in very fine order, and again raised a loud cry as they stopped to take breath.

Then the English archers, who, as I have said, were in the wings, saw that they were near enough, and began to send their arrows on the French with great vigour.

Then the French seeing the English come towards them in this manner, placed themselves together in order, everyone under his banner, their helmets on their heads. The Constable, the Marshal, the admirals, and the other princes earnestly exhorted their men to fight the English well and bravely and when it came to the approach the trumpets and clarions resounded everywhere but the French began to hold down their heads, especially those who had no bucklers, for the impetuosity of the English arrows, which fell so heavily that no one durst uncover or look up.

Thus they went forward a little, then made a little retreat, but before they could come to close quarters, many of the French were disabled and wounded by the arrows and when they came quite up to the English, they were, as has been said, so closely pressed one against another that none of them could lift their arms to strike their enemies, except some that were in front.

[The French knights] struck into these English archers, who had their stakes fixed in front of them. their. horses stumbled among the stakes, and they were speedily slain by the archers, which was a great pity. And most of the rest, through fear, gave way and fell back into their vanguard, to whom they were a great hindrance and they opened their ranks in several places, and made them fall back and lose their footing in some land newly sown for their horses had been so wounded by the arrows that the men could no longer manage them.

[The French] men-at-arms without number began to fall and their horses feeling the arrows coming upon them took to flight before the enemy, and following their example many of the French turned and fled. Soon afterwards the English archers, seeing the vanguard thus shaken, issued from behind their stockade, threw away their bows and quivers, then took their swords, hatchets, mallets, axes, falcon-beaks and other weapons, and, pushing into the places where they saw these breaches, struck down and killed these Frenchmen without mercy, and never ceased to kill till the said vanguard which had fought little or not at all was completely overwhelmed, and these went on striking right and left till they came upon the second battalion, which was behind the advance guard, and there the King personally threw himself into the fight with his men-at-arms.

As the English continued to gain the upper hand, King Henry received news that the French were attacking at the rear of his army and that French reinforcements were approaching. King Henry ordered that all French prisoners be put to the sword - an order his knights were reluctant to follow as, if kept alive, these prisoners could bring a healthy ransom:

"When the King of England perceived them coming thus he caused it to be published that every one that had a prisoner should immediately kill him, which those who had any were unwilling to do, for they expected to get great ransoms for them. But when the King was informed of this he appointed a gentleman with two hundred archers whom he commanded to go through the host and kill all the prisoners, whoever they might be. This esquire, without delay or objection, fulfilled the command of his sovereign lord, which was a most pitiable thing, for in cold blood all the nobility of France was beheaded and inhumanly cut to pieces, and all through this accursed company, a sorry set compared with the noble captive chivalry, who when they saw that the English were ready to receive them, all immediately turned and fled, each to save his own life. Many of the cavalry escaped but of those on foot there were many among the dead."

Reference:
Wavrin, Jehan de, Chronicles, 1399-1422, trans. Sir W. Hardy and E. Hardy (1887) Keegan, John, The Illustrated Face of Battle: a study of Agincourt, Waterloo and the Somme (1989).


Top 5 Facts: Battle of Agincourt


1. Victory songs
– After the English victory at Agincourt, several celebratory songs were written. Najpoznatiji od njih je The Agincourt Carol.

2. V
– The derogatory ‘V’ sign of modern culture stems from Agincourt. The gesture was used by English archers in defiance of the French threat that any caught longbowmen would have their two bow-fingers cut off.

3. Outnumbered – One of the most contended issues today is exactly how badly the French outnumbered the English forces. Conservative figures lie around 4:3, while other estimates place it at 4:1 or even 6:1.

4. Welsh allies – The English forces at Agincourt were not just from England but Wales too. Indeed, one of the most notable generals, Dafydd Gam, died in the battle after reportedly saving Henry’s life.

5. The waiting game – Despite Henry’s resounding victory, he was not officially recognised as regent and heir to the French throne until 1420, five years after the conflict.


Gledaj video: Povijesne kontroverze: Hrvati u tridesetogodišnjem ratu.


Komentari:

  1. Shaktijinn

    Ispričavam se, ali ova varijanta mi ne ide blizu. Tko još može što reći?

  2. Seif Al Din

    niste u pravu. uvjeren sam. Razgovarajmo o tome. Pisite mi na PM.

  3. Jacy

    Predlažem vam da dođete na stranicu na kojoj ima puno informacija o temi koja vas zanima.

  4. Tazilkree

    Preporučujem vam da posjetite web mjesto s ogromnim brojem članaka na temu koji vas zanimaju. Mogu potražiti vezu.



Napišite poruku