On this day in 1415 – Henry V of England, with his lightly armoured infantry and archers, defeats the heavily armoured French cavalry in the Battle of Agincourt, during the Hundred Years’ War.

30 comments

  1. The Battle of Agincourt, on 25 October 1415, was a decisive battle in the Hundred Years’ War (1337–1453) that resulted in the victory of the English over the French.

    The English army, led by King Henry V, famously achieved victory in spite of the numerical superiority of its opponent.

    The battle repeated other English successes in the Hundred Years’ War, such as the Battle of Crécy (1346) and the Battle of Poitiers (1356), and made possible England’s subsequent conquest of Normandy and the Treaty of Troyes (1420), which named Henry V heir to the French crown.

    Early in the morning on October 25 (the feast day of St. Crispin), 1415, Henry positioned his army for battle on a recently plowed field bounded by woods. His men-at-arms were stationed in the centre, flanked by wedges of archers who carried longbows that had an effective range of 250 yards (229 metres). The terrain favoured Henry’s army and disadvantaged its opponent, as it reduced the numerical advantage of the French army by narrowing the front. This would prevent maneuvers that might overwhelm the English ranks.

    Fighting commenced at 11:00 AM, as the English brought their longbows within killing range and the first line of French knights advanced, led by cavalry. The field that the French had to cross to meet their enemy was muddy after a week of rain and slowed their progress, during which time they endured casualties from English arrows.

    When the first French line reached the English front, the cavalry were unable to overwhelm the archers, who had driven sharpened stakes into the ground at an angle before themselves. This was an innovative technique that the English had not used in the Battles of Crécy and Poitiers. Eventually the archers abandoned their longbows and began fighting hand-to-hand with swords and axes alongside the men-at-arms.

    The next line of French knights that poured in found themselves so tightly packed (the field narrowed at the English end) that they were unable to use their weapons effectively, and the tide of the battle began to turn toward the English. As the English were collecting prisoners, a band of French peasants led by local noblemen began plundering Henry’s baggage behind the lines.

    Thinking it was an attack from the rear, Henry had the French nobles he was holding prisoner killed. The third line of the French army, recoiling at the pile of corpses before them and unable to make an effective charge, was then massacred swiftly.
    The battle probably lasted no longer than three hours and was perhaps as short as half an hour, according to some estimates. While the precise number of casualties is unknown, it is estimated that English losses amounted to about 400 and French losses to about 6,000, many of whom were noblemen.

  5. What infuriates me to no end is the common idea that this was a battle between good and evil, in which the French were supposedly arrogant and immoral whereas the English were supposedly virtuous and humble. This jingoistic bullshit is still alive and well off today as demonstrated by this pile of crap called “the king”. The French were defending their country from a foreign agression motivated only by Henry V’s gigantic ambition and responsible for decades of horrendous suffering for the people. If someone was arrogant, cruel and evil in this story, it’s certainly not the French. Who btw won the war in the end, after inflicting several crushing defeats to the “superior” English and their “invincible” longbowmen.

  7. I never understood how it’s Agincourt for Brits, and Azincourt for us on the other side of the channel (also I’m lazy so I never researched more than that)

  10. Brits, every minor historical event: “We lost the war, every significant battle, but thanks to random geographic and climatic accidents we survived this particular battle”.

  11. I’m used to French saltiness in this sub but I don’t get it here, as it states we killed loads of your noblemen, effectively ending some family lines and saving you the effort when it came to guillotine time a few hundred years later, you’re welcome

  12. Huh looking at the picture they were actually miles closer to each other than I thought. Don’t see why the longbows were so important.

  13. The Hundred Years war is an interesting one, because both sides have positives that they can take away from it. The English have great tactical victories like Sluys, Poitiers, Crecy & Agincourt. The French have their great resilience, along with good strategic direction, e.g. the reduction of Gacogne in the years after the Poitiers campaign.

  14. King Henry V: What’s he that wishes so?

    My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:

    If we are mark’d to die, we are enow

    To do our country loss; and if to live,

    The fewer men, the greater share of honour.

    God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.

    By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,

    Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;

    It yearns me not if men my garments wear;

    Such outward things dwell not in my desires:

    But if it be a sin to covet honour,

    I am the most offending soul alive.

    No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:

    God’s peace! I would not lose so great an honour

    As one man more, methinks, would share from me

    For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!

    Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,

    That he which hath no stomach to this fight,

    Let him depart; his passport shall be made

    And crowns for convoy put into his purse:

    We would not die in that man’s company

    That fears his fellowship to die with us.

    This day is called the feast of Crispian:

    He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,

    Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,

    And rouse him at the name of Crispian.

    He that shall live this day, and see old age,

    Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,

    And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’

    Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.

    And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’

    Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,

    But he’ll remember with advantages

    What feats he did that day: then shall our names.

    Familiar in his mouth as household words

    Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,

    Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,

    Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.

    This story shall the good man teach his son;

    And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,

    From this day to the ending of the world,

    But we in it shall be remember’d;

    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

    Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,

    This day shall gentle his condition:

    And gentlemen in England now a-bed

    Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

  17. Aka. the medieval equivalent of the Turkish army driving its Leopard II tanks into a city without infantry support and losing its “elite” as a result…

    P.s.: Bowmen didn’t make heavy/shock cavalry obsolete.
    Incompetence made it impotent. However it remained a force to be reckoned with long after this day, as long as people knew what the fuck they were doing.
    For example at the siege of vienna similar troops managed to whoop the ass of early gunpowder based army ofhte ottoman empire.

  18. Reminds me of the time Flemish farmers defeated the heavily armoured French army vietcong style by luring them into swamps during the Battle of the Golden Spurs in 1302.

    But I do like to leave out the minor detail where the French came back years later and won the war.

  20. Somebody knows why the archers are in front? It seems kinda dumb doesn’t it? Unless the field is very narrow (like a canyon) which it doesn’t seem like, I don’t understand it

    I’m a total newbie when it comes to medieval wars and archery so please don’t flame me for not knowing that

  22. English history teaching is odd. The 100 years’ war was a struggle between two French royal families wanting to rule France. Had the French royals who ruled England(Plantagenets) won the war then England would’ve assimilated even further into the French culture, English as a language would’ve not survived for much longer.

  23. The intricate politics of France at the time is as fascinating as the battle itself. The battle had huge consequences for the factions within France. The real winner of that battle was the Burgundian duke, who did not participate in the battle.

  24. Given that the ruling families of England were essentially French, saying the 100 year war was a case of England versus France is probably disingenuous.

  26. 1) The English had 1500 heavily armored knights, English foot combat armor being consistently heavier than what was worn on the continent where knights had better horses and you had more mobile hit and run/skirmish warfare

    2) The French main attack was done on foot, not as cavalry

    3) The English captured the French battle plans some days before the battle so they knew the French planned to nail them with flanking attacks on open ground

    4) The battlefield of Agincourt was selected because it prevented the French from effectively using cavalry or their missile troops meaning they actually only deployed their heavy infantry (aka knights on foot) in the center because there was little room for more

    5) It was not the English against the French because the English king acted to enforce his claim as French king. Technically the 100 Years War were several French civil wars between multiple factions for which the Plantagenets in England used English troops to get a better aka richer kingdom.

    Case in point: The “French” kings consistently had trouble when the Burgundians joined the English kings and the English kings consistently started losing when the Burgundians joined the French kings. Because Burgundy actually held richer territories than either.

Leave a Reply