What do you think?
Rate this book
1415 Agincourt: A New History
As night fell in Picardy on Thursday October 24, 1415, Henry V and his English troops, worn down by their long march after the taking of Harfleur and diminished by the dysentery they had suffered there, can little have dreamt that the battle of the next day would give them one of the most complete victories ever won. Anne Curry’s startling history recreates the campaign and battle from the perspectives of the English and the French. Only now, through an in-depth investigation of the contemporary narrative sources as well as the administrative records, and through a new look at the terrain where the battle was fought, can we come to firmer conclusions on what exactly happened and why. One of the best battle accounts ever published, Anne Curry has updated this classic work in honor of 600th anniversary of Agincourt.
320 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 2000
57 people are currently reading
316 people want to read
About the author
Anne Curry
57 books18 followersAnne Curry is Professor of Medieval History and Dean of the Faculty of Humanities at the University of Southampton, after teaching for many years at the University of Reading. She has published many books and articles on the Hundred Years War, as well as definitive works on Agincourt itself and an on-line database of all known soldiers between 1369 and 1453 (www.medievalsoldier.org ). An historical advisor to the battlefield centres at Azincourt, Shrewsbury, and Bosworth, she is co-chair of the "Agincourt 600" committee, tasked with organizing the commemorations of the sixth hundredth anniversary of the battle. President of the Historical Association between 2008 and 2011, she is also a former Vice-President of the Royal Historical Society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
April 8, 2022
Agincourt: A New History by Anne Curry is a comprehensive analysis of the entire 1415 campaign of Henry V of England. This is an impressive book in several aspects—particularly in its depth of research and the supplements to the main body of text.
The defining characteristic of this book is its reliance on textual sources from the period. Not only was the Agincourt campaign featured in manifold chronicles of the 15th century, but there are also quite a number of extant administrative documents and records. As a result, there is a lot of work for the historian of this campaign to do as they try to make sense of the inconsistencies between chronicles and of course account for their biases and reliability.
Professor Curry’s approach in this book is to let the reader in on her critical analysis of these written sources. Much of the text consists of her relating what the various sources have to say. This approach is commendable for the complete transparency between author and reader. We never have to doubt how she goes about drawing conclusions. Moreover, having access to the real sources, whether paraphrased or in some translated fragments, is quite a valuable resource to the modern reader who is unlikely to be able to read, much less have access to the original sources.
Unfortunately, saturating the narrative with her analysis of the sources makes reading the book a slog at times. There are also times where Curry interrupts the narrative to jump forward or back in time to draw connections between events. This method can lead to such oddities as repeating the same story of the Duke of Brabant arriving at the battle late and in such haste that he used a trumpeter’s banner in place of a surcoat (the Duke was killed shortly after his arrival). This anecdote, as stirring as it is, is repeated four times, almost verbatim.
The bigger issue, for me, was that the narrative needed more synthesis of the sources to supplement the close-reading analysis. There were several occasions where it felt to me that after presenting what the various chroniclers had to say on a topic, the narrative would move on without the author giving her conclusion on what she thought had happened. I appreciate that she has enough confidence in the reader to allow them to draw their own conclusions. But she is the expert, and, as such, reading her opinion can be as valuable as reading what the sources say.
However, it would be inaccurate to describe this book as poorly written. There are even times when the text is a pleasure to read and the narrative moves fluidly. But this book is not meant to be an exciting narrative history. Rather, the author’s goal is to dispel the myths surrounding this campaign and battle and try to reconstruct it as accurately as possible. This approach is probably most apparent in Professor Curry’s analysis of the numbers of the armies on both sides. Instead of relying on the widely varying numbers in the chronicles, she bases her conclusions on the administrative and financial records. This approach is particularly effective for the English army, as the indenture contracts and muster rolls which were used to recruit the army survive. Indeed, I think the chapter on the raising of Henry V’s army was the most interesting and most informative in the entire book.
Determining numbers for the French army is more difficult as fewer records survived and is, ultimately, more controversial. The legend of the battle of Agincourt depends on the narrative of the English army being outnumbered by a large margin. Professor Curry is not afraid to claim that French army was not significantly larger than the English one. Personally, this assessment makes sense to me. Henry V’s army was quite large in its own right—despite the outbreak of dysentery at Harfleur—and, considering the size of medieval armies at the time, it is highly unlikely that the French were able to raise an army several times larger than Henry’s.
The main body of text is not too long, at only 251 pages. However, there is quite a lot of supplemental material in the book. There are 124 images, including 75 colored ones on glossy plates. Many of the latter are photographs of the locations of the campaign from the author herself. There are many end notes as well, but more interesting are the five appendices. These contain useful information to refer to while reading, but more strikingly, a list of all the names of the English soldiers known to have served on the campaign, over 6,000 of them. This is an incredible addition to the book. There are a few maps, but they are disappointingly low-quality compared to the rest of the book.
Agincourt: A New History is a good book which made me engage critically with the text. I hesitate to recommend it to the general reader, however, as the author assumes that the reader has an understanding of the main events of the campaign and battle before reading. Likewise, despite a few detailed introductory chapters discussing the years which led up to the campaign of 1415, those unfamiliar with the Anglo-French relations in the Hundred Years War might be overwhelmed by the politics and the slew of dukes and princes.
We will never know exactly what happened at Agincourt on October 25th, 1415, but this book certainly provides a convincing interpretation of what might have happened.
The defining characteristic of this book is its reliance on textual sources from the period. Not only was the Agincourt campaign featured in manifold chronicles of the 15th century, but there are also quite a number of extant administrative documents and records. As a result, there is a lot of work for the historian of this campaign to do as they try to make sense of the inconsistencies between chronicles and of course account for their biases and reliability.
Professor Curry’s approach in this book is to let the reader in on her critical analysis of these written sources. Much of the text consists of her relating what the various sources have to say. This approach is commendable for the complete transparency between author and reader. We never have to doubt how she goes about drawing conclusions. Moreover, having access to the real sources, whether paraphrased or in some translated fragments, is quite a valuable resource to the modern reader who is unlikely to be able to read, much less have access to the original sources.
Unfortunately, saturating the narrative with her analysis of the sources makes reading the book a slog at times. There are also times where Curry interrupts the narrative to jump forward or back in time to draw connections between events. This method can lead to such oddities as repeating the same story of the Duke of Brabant arriving at the battle late and in such haste that he used a trumpeter’s banner in place of a surcoat (the Duke was killed shortly after his arrival). This anecdote, as stirring as it is, is repeated four times, almost verbatim.
The bigger issue, for me, was that the narrative needed more synthesis of the sources to supplement the close-reading analysis. There were several occasions where it felt to me that after presenting what the various chroniclers had to say on a topic, the narrative would move on without the author giving her conclusion on what she thought had happened. I appreciate that she has enough confidence in the reader to allow them to draw their own conclusions. But she is the expert, and, as such, reading her opinion can be as valuable as reading what the sources say.
However, it would be inaccurate to describe this book as poorly written. There are even times when the text is a pleasure to read and the narrative moves fluidly. But this book is not meant to be an exciting narrative history. Rather, the author’s goal is to dispel the myths surrounding this campaign and battle and try to reconstruct it as accurately as possible. This approach is probably most apparent in Professor Curry’s analysis of the numbers of the armies on both sides. Instead of relying on the widely varying numbers in the chronicles, she bases her conclusions on the administrative and financial records. This approach is particularly effective for the English army, as the indenture contracts and muster rolls which were used to recruit the army survive. Indeed, I think the chapter on the raising of Henry V’s army was the most interesting and most informative in the entire book.
Determining numbers for the French army is more difficult as fewer records survived and is, ultimately, more controversial. The legend of the battle of Agincourt depends on the narrative of the English army being outnumbered by a large margin. Professor Curry is not afraid to claim that French army was not significantly larger than the English one. Personally, this assessment makes sense to me. Henry V’s army was quite large in its own right—despite the outbreak of dysentery at Harfleur—and, considering the size of medieval armies at the time, it is highly unlikely that the French were able to raise an army several times larger than Henry’s.
The main body of text is not too long, at only 251 pages. However, there is quite a lot of supplemental material in the book. There are 124 images, including 75 colored ones on glossy plates. Many of the latter are photographs of the locations of the campaign from the author herself. There are many end notes as well, but more interesting are the five appendices. These contain useful information to refer to while reading, but more strikingly, a list of all the names of the English soldiers known to have served on the campaign, over 6,000 of them. This is an incredible addition to the book. There are a few maps, but they are disappointingly low-quality compared to the rest of the book.
Agincourt: A New History is a good book which made me engage critically with the text. I hesitate to recommend it to the general reader, however, as the author assumes that the reader has an understanding of the main events of the campaign and battle before reading. Likewise, despite a few detailed introductory chapters discussing the years which led up to the campaign of 1415, those unfamiliar with the Anglo-French relations in the Hundred Years War might be overwhelmed by the politics and the slew of dukes and princes.
We will never know exactly what happened at Agincourt on October 25th, 1415, but this book certainly provides a convincing interpretation of what might have happened.
January 22, 2021
A well-written and well-researched history of the battle.
Curry is cautious with the sources, but still provides a full account of the battle, as well as the diplomatic background, Henry’s career, the raising of the army, the Harfleur siege, and the battle and its aftermath. The book does have a narrative format, but much of the book is an analysis of the battle, its controversies, and its source material.
Unfortunately, the maps are disappointing, and Curry doesn’t always go into detail about the battle’s controversies. Some more discussion of the longbow would have been helpful, as would more on Henry’s objectives.
An insightful, engaging history.
Curry is cautious with the sources, but still provides a full account of the battle, as well as the diplomatic background, Henry’s career, the raising of the army, the Harfleur siege, and the battle and its aftermath. The book does have a narrative format, but much of the book is an analysis of the battle, its controversies, and its source material.
Unfortunately, the maps are disappointing, and Curry doesn’t always go into detail about the battle’s controversies. Some more discussion of the longbow would have been helpful, as would more on Henry’s objectives.
An insightful, engaging history.
December 19, 2021
"Henry had invaded France in 1415 as the son of a usurper and with his own title insecure. There was even a plot to kill him on the very day he had chosen for embarkation. Had he failed in France, his future in England would have been precarious. But he did not fail. He returned as God's chosen king and warrior." (p. 246)
While this is a good summation of what Agincourt meant to Henry personally, reading these words meant that I was within a few pages of the end of this fact-packed but terribly ponderous read. I had been reading it for roughly 11 months, with numerous starts and stops because I found it a very dull read, but necessary drudgery because of the study I have been doing of the time period and the associated Shakespearean plays. Anne Curry is considered the world's leading expert on Agincourt and I would submit to you that that is an achievement in and of itself. It is quite another to expect an academic to then write a compelling book. We can't all expect the narrative triumphs that Anthony Beevor and Dan Jones can deliver.
In fact, that's probably Curry's burden. She knows far too much and hence she writes the way an accountant might go through the books with a business owner: full of starts and stops, tangents for concerns and qualifications, and lots of "it depends" in relation to the chronicles and the other sources. It makes for a very stop-start reading experience that is far from pleasurable and would have definitely made less resolute readers give up (I nearly did several times).
A further thought: the facts of the case make it very unlikely that anything like the St. Crispin's Day speech was given, and given how many English (and in part, world) schoolchildren consider Shakespeare as proper history, books like Curry's Agincourt are helpful corrections and context for all that Shakespeare got right (quite a lot!) and that which he compressed and embellished (not too much). In the overarching narrative of what Agincourt meant historically, the St. Crispin's Day speech is entirely appropriate artistically, even if it never happened.
A final thought: while Agincourt is very much seen as a victory of the English, it was at at time when "England" was geographically part of France as well, and this defeat lay heavily on the French consciousness for decades, even centuries. We saw this play out with the English previously with Crecy, giving irrational motives for war with England (revanche).
If you want a heavily end-noted and researched book, I think you could hardly do better than this. If you're looking for an enjoyable read, I have to imagine there must be better.
"His army of around 12,000 was one of the largest to enter France during the whole of the Hundred Years' War." (p. 13)
"Henry put to death a soldier who had stolen a pyx from a church near Corbie." (p. 165)
"There are other reasons why the king should require silence in his camp. It encouraged prayerfulness, and it is likely that confessions continued to be heard through the night in preparation for the conflict of the next day..." (p. 175)
"The best (longbow) archers could fire fifteen a minute...over 7,000 men were firing simultaneously." (p. 202)
"Boiling stripped the flesh from the bones and was a means of preserving bodies more appropriate for armies on the move than embalming." (p. 230)
(regarding the ferocity of the archery attacks) "The French men-at-arms had no training for the situation and no means of retaliation." (p. 249)
While this is a good summation of what Agincourt meant to Henry personally, reading these words meant that I was within a few pages of the end of this fact-packed but terribly ponderous read. I had been reading it for roughly 11 months, with numerous starts and stops because I found it a very dull read, but necessary drudgery because of the study I have been doing of the time period and the associated Shakespearean plays. Anne Curry is considered the world's leading expert on Agincourt and I would submit to you that that is an achievement in and of itself. It is quite another to expect an academic to then write a compelling book. We can't all expect the narrative triumphs that Anthony Beevor and Dan Jones can deliver.
In fact, that's probably Curry's burden. She knows far too much and hence she writes the way an accountant might go through the books with a business owner: full of starts and stops, tangents for concerns and qualifications, and lots of "it depends" in relation to the chronicles and the other sources. It makes for a very stop-start reading experience that is far from pleasurable and would have definitely made less resolute readers give up (I nearly did several times).
A further thought: the facts of the case make it very unlikely that anything like the St. Crispin's Day speech was given, and given how many English (and in part, world) schoolchildren consider Shakespeare as proper history, books like Curry's Agincourt are helpful corrections and context for all that Shakespeare got right (quite a lot!) and that which he compressed and embellished (not too much). In the overarching narrative of what Agincourt meant historically, the St. Crispin's Day speech is entirely appropriate artistically, even if it never happened.
A final thought: while Agincourt is very much seen as a victory of the English, it was at at time when "England" was geographically part of France as well, and this defeat lay heavily on the French consciousness for decades, even centuries. We saw this play out with the English previously with Crecy, giving irrational motives for war with England (revanche).
If you want a heavily end-noted and researched book, I think you could hardly do better than this. If you're looking for an enjoyable read, I have to imagine there must be better.
"His army of around 12,000 was one of the largest to enter France during the whole of the Hundred Years' War." (p. 13)
"Henry put to death a soldier who had stolen a pyx from a church near Corbie." (p. 165)
"There are other reasons why the king should require silence in his camp. It encouraged prayerfulness, and it is likely that confessions continued to be heard through the night in preparation for the conflict of the next day..." (p. 175)
"The best (longbow) archers could fire fifteen a minute...over 7,000 men were firing simultaneously." (p. 202)
"Boiling stripped the flesh from the bones and was a means of preserving bodies more appropriate for armies on the move than embalming." (p. 230)
(regarding the ferocity of the archery attacks) "The French men-at-arms had no training for the situation and no means of retaliation." (p. 249)
March 30, 2020
A challenging but rewarding read!
I was unprepared for the overwhelming number of unfamiliar names and I couldn’t quite shake the feeling that if this were to become some television mini series that there might not be enough actors in the English speaking world to make up a full cast...
And I’ll admit that reading about royal receipts for random figures doesn’t make me want to jump on a horse and rescue the fair maiden....
Just as I was about to drown in a tidal wave of French names involved with a civil war I knew nothing about I started noticing the parentheses that followed these names...(died at Agincourt) over and over.....
This was an absolutely fascinating look at a stunning battle that has been mythologized for 600 years.... it wasn’t until I watched YouTube videos proving that longbow arrows could NOT pierce the armor of the period that I finally had to ask... “Well then, how DID they win?”
If you’re interest in what real historical documents available today have to say about Agincourt THIS is the book for you! As an American living in California it just amazes me that there are still extant physical documents that tell the story of this campaign.....
Another truly satisfying aspect of becoming engaged with this work is observing the repeated analysis of the documents... distinguishing between what chroniclers wrote, when they wrote, and their motives for what they wrote with what our culture accepts as a “true” account of the battle.....
I’ll be re-reading this book!
Jeff
I was unprepared for the overwhelming number of unfamiliar names and I couldn’t quite shake the feeling that if this were to become some television mini series that there might not be enough actors in the English speaking world to make up a full cast...
And I’ll admit that reading about royal receipts for random figures doesn’t make me want to jump on a horse and rescue the fair maiden....
Just as I was about to drown in a tidal wave of French names involved with a civil war I knew nothing about I started noticing the parentheses that followed these names...(died at Agincourt) over and over.....
This was an absolutely fascinating look at a stunning battle that has been mythologized for 600 years.... it wasn’t until I watched YouTube videos proving that longbow arrows could NOT pierce the armor of the period that I finally had to ask... “Well then, how DID they win?”
If you’re interest in what real historical documents available today have to say about Agincourt THIS is the book for you! As an American living in California it just amazes me that there are still extant physical documents that tell the story of this campaign.....
Another truly satisfying aspect of becoming engaged with this work is observing the repeated analysis of the documents... distinguishing between what chroniclers wrote, when they wrote, and their motives for what they wrote with what our culture accepts as a “true” account of the battle.....
I’ll be re-reading this book!
Jeff
February 4, 2013
Wants for a tad more narrative structure. Prose can get thick with names, places, and informational details. I wanted a little more "story." The subject matter remains fascinating, and the book is well researched.
January 30, 2019
Way too technical for an idler like me
December 17, 2022
I first became familiar with the Battle of Agincourt through Shakespeare’s “Henry V”. Not the play from which the above quote is pulled, but the 1989 film with Kenneth Branagh – featuring his moving rendition of that Saint Crispin’s Day speech. To this day, if I need to get pumped up for something (a test, a new job, etc) I’ll put on that scene. I defy anyone to not be stirred by Branagh’s inspiring, pugnacious delivery. That said, Shakespeare’s account of Agincourt in the play is circumstantial. He doesn’t describe the battle in any way, but talks about the events leading up to it and after it.
The more recent film “The King” also utilizes Shakespeare as source material, but then tries to pry in the pitched battle itself. It’s well done technically, though I feel it fails to properly depict the sheer scope of the Battle of Agincourt. The battle in “The King” feels like a romper-stomper featuring a few hundred men at arms and archers, where the actual battle pitted thousands against one another, and included at least 3000-5000 English archers (depending on the estimates you believe). It’s those estimates that largely feature as the subject in today’s book review.
Anne Curry’s 1415 Agincourt, A New History digs deep into those numbers, utilizing a variety of chronicles and first hand accounts, including the Gesta Henrici Quinti, Liber Metricus, Titus Livius, the Pseudo-Elmham, the Brut, the Religieux, and others. For an event that took place over 600 years ago, there’s a surprising amount of information about it. That said, the information is sometimes contradictory (as many historical chronicles tend to be). Maybe the French account differs from English account. Perhaps the author was viewing the battle from the rear where they couldn’t see so well, or maybe they were incited to exaggerate the facts in order to make one side or the other appear more valiant.
Curry pours over these accounts and does her best to distill them, to compare them to one another, and ultimately to pull out a likely truth. Some of these truths are almost certain, as various chroniclers might describe the same thing. Others are more obscured by time and the vagaries of the available accounts, so we’re left asking questions or making assumptions.
1415 Agincourt, A New History is a comprehensive analysis of the battle and not really a narrative of it. The author covers the political events leading up to Henry’s campaign in Normandy, dives into the Siege of Harfleur, and even dissects the activities that took place post-Agincourt – but she does so employing a scholarly approach. Curry does a good job of reaching her conclusions and that brings them real tangible credibility, but this sometimes makes for a more academic and ponderous read. I started this book in March of 2022 and only completed it in December. It took Henry less time to complete his whole campaign in France and sail back to England. There is a lot of data that’s examined, and it sometimes feels like the narrative is only a loose framework binding that data together.
With that said, it’s also a fascinating and rewarding read for those willing to go once more unto the breach. The examination of the battle itself (which starts at about the halfway mark of this book) dives deep into the geography of the place, the timing of events, the logistics of how the English archers and their long-bows managed to sway the odds, and how the French seemed powerless to stop it. All of this is examined closely at a technical level – and I couldn’t get enough.
The more recent film “The King” also utilizes Shakespeare as source material, but then tries to pry in the pitched battle itself. It’s well done technically, though I feel it fails to properly depict the sheer scope of the Battle of Agincourt. The battle in “The King” feels like a romper-stomper featuring a few hundred men at arms and archers, where the actual battle pitted thousands against one another, and included at least 3000-5000 English archers (depending on the estimates you believe). It’s those estimates that largely feature as the subject in today’s book review.
Anne Curry’s 1415 Agincourt, A New History digs deep into those numbers, utilizing a variety of chronicles and first hand accounts, including the Gesta Henrici Quinti, Liber Metricus, Titus Livius, the Pseudo-Elmham, the Brut, the Religieux, and others. For an event that took place over 600 years ago, there’s a surprising amount of information about it. That said, the information is sometimes contradictory (as many historical chronicles tend to be). Maybe the French account differs from English account. Perhaps the author was viewing the battle from the rear where they couldn’t see so well, or maybe they were incited to exaggerate the facts in order to make one side or the other appear more valiant.
Curry pours over these accounts and does her best to distill them, to compare them to one another, and ultimately to pull out a likely truth. Some of these truths are almost certain, as various chroniclers might describe the same thing. Others are more obscured by time and the vagaries of the available accounts, so we’re left asking questions or making assumptions.
1415 Agincourt, A New History is a comprehensive analysis of the battle and not really a narrative of it. The author covers the political events leading up to Henry’s campaign in Normandy, dives into the Siege of Harfleur, and even dissects the activities that took place post-Agincourt – but she does so employing a scholarly approach. Curry does a good job of reaching her conclusions and that brings them real tangible credibility, but this sometimes makes for a more academic and ponderous read. I started this book in March of 2022 and only completed it in December. It took Henry less time to complete his whole campaign in France and sail back to England. There is a lot of data that’s examined, and it sometimes feels like the narrative is only a loose framework binding that data together.
With that said, it’s also a fascinating and rewarding read for those willing to go once more unto the breach. The examination of the battle itself (which starts at about the halfway mark of this book) dives deep into the geography of the place, the timing of events, the logistics of how the English archers and their long-bows managed to sway the odds, and how the French seemed powerless to stop it. All of this is examined closely at a technical level – and I couldn’t get enough.
July 27, 2022
This is a satisfying book to read about Agincourt, which takes us from the preparation stage, to Harfleur, the long crossing to Calais, the battle itself and the aftermath. I wish I could say all my questions were answered, but alas, I think I have even more questions than when I started. Anne Curry asks a lot of good questions herself, and she also reasons out the many interpretations. Unfortunately, every chronicler has a different point of view—some are eye-witnesses, others write second-hand. Even eye witnesses can’t see every part of the battlefield at once. All of the sources get equal time, and if we’re lucky the passages that make the most sense will get Curry’s vote. But there are no definitive answers, which of course is not her fault. It seems that we are destined never to know how many fought on the French side, nor now many were killed. How were the archers deployed? There are so many possibilities. She does not venture to guess Henry V’s frame of mind at any point, except by judging his actions. Anyway, at important junctures, Curry’s logic will carry the day:
There was no need for archers to be sharpshooters able to hit targets with consummate accuracy. It was the weight and continuous nature of their fire that had the necessary effect. This made it extremely difficult for the French to keep up the momentum of a foot charge. By the time the French engaged with the English men-at-arms they were wearied and wounded. We cannot imagine what it was like to try to walk forward under such a barrage. Men could not be trained for this situation. It was therefore a totally novel and exceptionally frightening situation. Furthermore, the archers were firing not only head-on but also from the flanks.
Reading this, I suddenly understood the novelty of the situation. Of course they would have no way of knowing what it felt like to run into an arrow storm. No wonder they blundered into each other! I can imagine the chaos. Some of Curry’s conclusions are debated; she feels that the numbers are much closer together than traditionally taught. She didn’t represent as many Welsh archers as expected in their numbers. Nonetheless, her reasoning and incredible research makes it hard to argue. Although I made plenty of bookmarks, I found the writing a bit of a struggle and wouldn’t call it light reading.
There was no need for archers to be sharpshooters able to hit targets with consummate accuracy. It was the weight and continuous nature of their fire that had the necessary effect. This made it extremely difficult for the French to keep up the momentum of a foot charge. By the time the French engaged with the English men-at-arms they were wearied and wounded. We cannot imagine what it was like to try to walk forward under such a barrage. Men could not be trained for this situation. It was therefore a totally novel and exceptionally frightening situation. Furthermore, the archers were firing not only head-on but also from the flanks.
Reading this, I suddenly understood the novelty of the situation. Of course they would have no way of knowing what it felt like to run into an arrow storm. No wonder they blundered into each other! I can imagine the chaos. Some of Curry’s conclusions are debated; she feels that the numbers are much closer together than traditionally taught. She didn’t represent as many Welsh archers as expected in their numbers. Nonetheless, her reasoning and incredible research makes it hard to argue. Although I made plenty of bookmarks, I found the writing a bit of a struggle and wouldn’t call it light reading.
June 8, 2025
This is a stunning book. It analyses very thoroughly the background to and the progress of King Henry V's campaign in France in 1415 which culminated in the battle of Agincourt. Using a vast array of sources and providing good maps and supporting statistical evidence, Anne Curry debates all the various elements of this campaign and does so in a wholly accessible fashion. The controversies around numbers and conduct (e.g. the killing of the French prisoners) are given context and balance. I thoroughly recommend this account of a famous campaign.
Read
May 18, 2022Gave up. Going into super details about all facet of the campaign. That itself is fine, but at my age can no longer tolerate the super small font used.
If they ever have a eBook version will consider to pick this up again...
If they ever have a eBook version will consider to pick this up again...
April 10, 2022
This book was mentioned as a reference in a novel that I really enjoyed, but this was a disappointment. It was to much like a textbook, a boring book written about an interesting subject. Shame
July 8, 2018
Agincourt: A New History is the result of Anne Curry’s ground-breaking scholarly research into the campaign and battle of 1415. There is no doubt in my mind that the book is a superb resource on the battle.
This is taken, of course, with the view that any historian or scholar can look at exactly the same pieces of evidence and come to very different conclusions and perspectives. The idea that any singular historian is ever in possession of the one complete, true interpretation or narrative is, of course, an assumption fraught with difficulty. Case in point, it was interesting reading this after reading Juliet Barker’s Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England, and remembering the way Barker had argued against some of Curry’s conclusions.
Personally, I found Agincourt: A New History to be a somewhat dense read, not so much for page numbers but how easy it was to get lost in the names, sources, numbers, calculations and more that Curry offers up.
This is not so much a ‘narrative’ of the battle, but rather an exploration and analysis of the various aspects and conflicting reports of the battle, and I think a familiarity with the battle is somewhat necessary to truly get a lot of out of this book. I’m Australian and was only ever educated about English history that related to Australia – our colonialization, our entry into the World Wars – so I was glad that this wasn't my first time reading about the battle.
Three stars. Excellent historical work, not so great reading experience.
This is taken, of course, with the view that any historian or scholar can look at exactly the same pieces of evidence and come to very different conclusions and perspectives. The idea that any singular historian is ever in possession of the one complete, true interpretation or narrative is, of course, an assumption fraught with difficulty. Case in point, it was interesting reading this after reading Juliet Barker’s Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle That Made England, and remembering the way Barker had argued against some of Curry’s conclusions.
Personally, I found Agincourt: A New History to be a somewhat dense read, not so much for page numbers but how easy it was to get lost in the names, sources, numbers, calculations and more that Curry offers up.
This is not so much a ‘narrative’ of the battle, but rather an exploration and analysis of the various aspects and conflicting reports of the battle, and I think a familiarity with the battle is somewhat necessary to truly get a lot of out of this book. I’m Australian and was only ever educated about English history that related to Australia – our colonialization, our entry into the World Wars – so I was glad that this wasn't my first time reading about the battle.
Three stars. Excellent historical work, not so great reading experience.
February 8, 2009
A new history! It's why I enjoy this subject, continually learning new things. Anne Curry is THE lady on this subject. She covers not just the battle, but the political situation in England and France in the years leading up to 1415.
The coverage of Henry V's muster of his army, the embarkation from Southampton, the capture of Harfluer and Henry's march across Normandy, eventually to battle the French forces at Agincourt. Throughout the summer of 1415, all is so cleverly investigated from contemporary documentation, as is the gathering and movement of the French during this time. The best documentation is English, the French are less detailed.
The book could have done with better maps to assist in following the narrative, but that is a minor criticism.
My son asked me what I was reading. Agincourt, I replied. Did we win? Rich, don't you remember, Friday 25th October 1415, you were there! What? I then showed him his name in the Muster role list of archers in Henry's army.
The coverage of Henry V's muster of his army, the embarkation from Southampton, the capture of Harfluer and Henry's march across Normandy, eventually to battle the French forces at Agincourt. Throughout the summer of 1415, all is so cleverly investigated from contemporary documentation, as is the gathering and movement of the French during this time. The best documentation is English, the French are less detailed.
The book could have done with better maps to assist in following the narrative, but that is a minor criticism.
My son asked me what I was reading. Agincourt, I replied. Did we win? Rich, don't you remember, Friday 25th October 1415, you were there! What? I then showed him his name in the Muster role list of archers in Henry's army.
November 24, 2015
A somewhat difficult read on an interesting subject. It was however very interesting watching the author make constant reference to the variety of often inconsistent accounts of the event.
January 25, 2016
most succinct, Informative and readable
January 7, 2016
Interesting reappraisal of the battle
Curry think numbers were more or less equal
She uses detailed analysis of what records remain
Well worth a read but its a dense one though informative
Curry think numbers were more or less equal
She uses detailed analysis of what records remain
Well worth a read but its a dense one though informative
December 17, 2015
If you are interested in the Battle of Agincourt - this is a must read.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews