Knights at Agincourt

[Atheling]

The errors are not neccesarily wrong, just duplications, so may or may not be correct!

So, they just need double checking.

Thanks mate. I've got quite a lot of stuff already so I wouldn't at all be surprised if there are a few contradictory armorial bearings.

[levied troop]

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 think the simple answer is, we don’t know.  Yes the medieval period was quite gaudy, but whether that meant they wore ‘full bling’ on the battlefield - I don’t think we can be sure.
And yes, it’s in the Herald’s contract. But  my point, inadequately expressed, was that if ‘full bling’ is being worn, then it’s going to be a bit like football team colours, quite a lot of people could identify some of the major or local players and might have noted their fate or position on the battlefield. Given that major battles are relatively rare and therefore more likely to attract written comment that might survive, why aren’t there better sources?

That won’t stop me painting the bling, but I do sometimes think that it might be more accurate to go drab and cover everyone in mud, shit, blood and entrails 

[Leunstoelgeneraal]

Spoken like a true wargamer !  If I may offer my modest  opinion: what we do is painting movies. Since real warfare is just an ugly violence, why should we waste beautiful sculpted figures by painting them realistic ? How lovely it is to see a line of infantry (or cavalry !) in all their beautiful original colours, not covered in mud and blood (to say nothing of shit and entrails  ). So let's keep everything completely unrealistic ! I for one will certainly try to obtain the book the OP showed.

[Atheling]

Spoken like a true wargamer !  If I may offer my modest  opinion: what we do is painting movies. Since real warfare is just an ugly violence, why should we waste beautiful sculpted figures by painting them realistic ? How lovely it is to see a line of infantry (or cavalry !) in all their beautiful original colours, not covered in mud and blood (to say nothing of shit and entrails  ). So let's keep everything completely unrealistic ! I for one will certainly try to obtain the book the OP showed.

But it's nice to learn about the warfare yeah? In as realistic terms as possible? Otherwise we would be doing a disservice to those who fought(?).

I'm with you on the toy soldiers front. But it's nice to have a set of rules etc that reflect the chosen section of history we imitate?

I don't know, I guess there's quite a strong dichotomy between real warfare, academia and indeed wargaming.

[Phil Portway]

Agree but some units need the campaign look.

My Templars

[Atheling]

Agreed. To an extent.

I do wonder at how well turned out the higher nobility would have been given their transportation resources?

I'm certain that the common man, who often found himself sleeping in a ditch would not have been so well turned out 

Nice brushwork BTW 

[jon_1066]

I was always given to understand that the primary purpose of heraldry was to identify its bearer on the battlefield.  Given that, I find it incredible that the men-at-arms/knights would not have had their heraldry on them in a battle.

As this book attests the amount of heraldry was quite large, what 480 odd present at this one battle?  How many schemes were there in total between the England and France at the time?  No wonder they needed heralds to help identify the particular individuals.  Remember the average person didn't have a handy pocket guide to the nobility of France on their person.  It would be like asking an average Joe to identify all the birds they see in a day and then wonder why they don't have the same knowledge as an expert ornithologist but identify nearly all of them as small brown ones.

So to find out what happened to any particular knight would have required the heralds to scour a few square miles of mud and filth hoping to find a surviving heraldic device with a body but even then what does that tell them? - that the chap may or may not be dead assuming the device belonged to the stripped body they did find.

[Atheling]

I was always given to understand that the primary purpose of heraldry was to identify its bearer on the battlefield.  Given that, I find it incredible that the men-at-arms/knights would not have had their heraldry on them in a battle.

I don't think anyone is saying that, unless I've missed something? (Quite possible!)

So to find out what happened to any particular knight would have required the heralds to scour a few square miles of mud and filth hoping to find a surviving heraldic device with a body but even then what does that tell them? - that the chap may or may not be dead assuming the device belonged to the stripped body they did find.

Which is why we have so little evidence for who was present at the major battles, sieges etc of the HYW and many other conflicts. Makes it simultaneously  both infuriating and interesting

[jon_1066]

I don't think anyone is saying that, unless I've missed something? (Quite possible!)

Which is why we have so little evidence for who was present at the major battles, sieges etc of the HYW and many other conflicts. Makes it simultaneously  both infuriating and interesting

I sort of thought that this was saying that:

...
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?

Hence my post. 

[Atheling]

I sort of thought that this was saying that:
Hence my post.

My bad. You're right.

Better start taking my pills again 

[levied troop]

I was indeed suggesting it as a possible option. By 1415 we’ve got full plate and a reliance on 2-handed weapons - so no surcoat or shield?  Horse barding might well have the full coat of arms, but again, it’s expensive and liable to be in a poor state if used regularly on campaign, never mind battle.  Flags and banners definitely, but other uses of heraldry in battle? 
As I said, I like painting my bling and would be buying that book if I didn’t already have the European Armorial on the bookshelf, but there’s a case to be made for a more subdued battlefield.
And  those Templar’s, properly dirty