*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 06:52:50 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686614
  • Total Topics: 118113
  • Online Today: 777
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: Knights at Agincourt  (Read 3221 times)

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059
Knights at Agincourt
« on: November 02, 2019, 10:13:19 PM »
Some one posted this book cover on a FB page of Forum (cannot find it). But, thought I would buy it.....Fantastic book for reference. It even has blank shield pages for you to add your own!









If it isn't enjoyable, it isn't gaming!

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2019, 10:24:37 PM »
Looks fab.

I've got one on order that ought to be on it's way to me by now.

Plenty of info? Other than the heraldry etc? Doe sit mention who was thought to have thought in what 'battle'/division for example?

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2019, 10:49:58 PM »
Looks fab.

I've got one on order that ought to be on it's way to me by now.

Plenty of info? Other than the heraldry etc? Doe sit mention who was thought to have thought in what 'battle'/division for example?

No, It gives a brief outline of the campaign and battle, but not the deployment. I am working through my own research of who was in what "Battle" atm.

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #3 on: November 03, 2019, 12:32:33 AM »
I am working through my own research of who was in what "Battle" atm.

Blimey Phil! I don't envy you that job..... I've been trying to figure it out for 25 years!  :o

Apart from the main protagonists it's extremely difficult to place the minor nobility, especially on the French side.

I'm afraid that, rather like Crecy, even the heralds couldn't place the majority of the (dead) men at arms.

It does look a great boon to any wargamer who wants to go down the Agincourt route. Anything that saves time in Late Medieval wargaming is an asset! :)

Offline Ethelred the Almost Ready

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1083
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2019, 05:17:31 AM »
After watching the King I would suggest don't bother painting heraldry or, for that matter, don't bother painting at all.  Get some lumps of plastic and cover them in mud and shit.

Offline levied troop

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1451
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2019, 08:35:20 AM »
That looks like a very useful resource.

I'm afraid that, rather like Crecy, even the heralds couldn't place the majority of the (dead) men at arms.
I’ve sometimes wondered about this. If ‘knights’ wore their full arms on shields or surcoats, why isn’t their identification and/or placement easier, indeed why do you need a herald to do it? Is it possible that they didn’t wear expensively decorated equipment into battle where it’s going to be covered in mud and shit and saved that stuff for tournaments and travelling? And that as painters and visual game players we just like colourful looking figures?

Or just that all the pretty looking stuff is looted well before the heralds get around to putting a dainty foot on the battlefield? :)

The League of Gentlemen Anti Alchemists
(We Turn Gold into Lead)

Offline Captain Harlock

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 709
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2019, 09:05:33 AM »
The book looks very interesting. The thing i dont like is the rather clean cut computerised look of the heraldry. It looks very sterilized and thats a general problem plaguing even the decals for miniatures.

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2019, 09:11:32 AM »
Is it possible that they didn’t wear expensively decorated equipment into battle where it’s going to be covered in mud and shit and saved that stuff for tournaments and travelling?

The simple answer to this is no. It was a real bling era. We would blush today at how gaudy their tastes were. After all, in a society where your social status is everything, you will make every effort to display it! 

I’ve sometimes wondered about this. If ‘knights’ wore their full arms on shields or surcoats, why isn’t their identification and/or placement easier
?

Again, there is a very simple answer. It is one of numbers. Quite often in battle the sheer numbers of dead were simply too much for the heralds of both sides, who's job it was to not only record the dead and their deeds but the deeds of the living also simply could not cope with the expansiveness of the task.
 
indeed why do you need a herald to do it?  And that as painters and visual game players we just like colourful looking figures?

Well yes. We do love colourful mini's but as regarding a Herald's station in life; it was quite literally in the contract! :)

Or just that all the pretty looking stuff is looted well before the heralds get around to putting a dainty foot on the battlefield? :)

No doubt this didn't help matters but I don't think this to be such an imperious reason. Sure clothing would be removed but it would likely remain on the battlefield, at least somewhere! I expect that it was armour, weapons and jewellery that attracted the looters and not the heraldic devices on their 'clothing'.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2019, 09:34:12 AM by Atheling »

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2019, 09:12:19 AM »
The book looks very interesting. The thing i dont like is the rather clean cut computerised look of the heraldry. It looks very sterilized and thats a general problem plaguing even the decals for miniatures.

You could repaint them? In any manner you wish :)

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2019, 10:21:25 AM »
Errors within the book, from FB:

One of chaps from FB also noticed that: same coat of arms for one English and one French p17 Edmund Ferrers, p34 Jean de Bauffremont...

Here are the error details and their references

p52/57: p52colart de la porte, p57 Guillaume de trie.

P35/39/40 p35 Jacques de Berlaymont, p39 Gilles de Chin, p40 lancelot de coucy

P49/50/51p49palamede de marquais, p50 Renaud de Montejan, p51Hugues de Neufville



These will need rectifying, but not end of the world!
« Last Edit: November 03, 2019, 11:46:30 AM by Phil Portway »

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2019, 11:52:29 AM »
A kind gent from FB Page put this up

http://www.wappenwiki.org/index.php?title=Gelre_Armorial&fbclid=IwAR00QUHIb8F85ba9GFRmEQz-VBAUONb9Sxv59auIkW7XADfCv69lMI8EctM

 :o :o :o

Thanks Phil!!  8)

I'll check through the errors when I get the book and print out the updated versions of the coat of arms.

BTW, does anyone know if the book includes and standards, as differentiated from a coat of arms, for either the English of the French?

I suppose I will find out soon but it never hurts to ask :)

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2019, 03:39:53 PM »
No standards in book

Offline Atheling

  • Elder God
  • Posts: 11905
    • Just Add Water Wargaming Blog
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2019, 04:05:37 PM »
No standards in book

Fair enough. You've put me out of my misery then  lol

I'm sure it will be good reference material which is what counts.

Offline Phil Portway

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Knights at Agincourt
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2019, 07:15:49 PM »
The errors are not neccesarily wrong, just duplications, so may or may not be correct!

So, they just need double checking.