Well put. I think the mistake so many people make is in defining effective as “killing.” All the longbows have to do is disrupt the French charge enough so that when it hits the English line it is on disarray and doesn’t hit with the force it otherwise would have. This has been the one of main purposes of missile weapons throughout history- the Roman Pilum, the Frankish Francisca etc.- if they kill some people, great, but wound, take out shields, create gaps in the line, create disarray, as well as the psychological factor- that is why missile weapons work in battles, even if they don’t necessarily kill a bunch of the enemy outright. And also like you mention, the archers can direct the French where they want the French to go by making certain approaches less favorable. Combine that with a smart use of topography and perhaps a lucky muddy field of battle that also slows a cavalry charge, and like you say, you have the perfect storm.
The battle of patay is an example of what can happen if when the arrows don’t disrupt the enemy. A comparatively small number of French knights defeated a significantly larger English force consisting of mostly bowmen.
Two main advantages that the British had in the battle was firstly, the flanks of the battlefield were trees, the direction was such that it was a sort of a funnel shape meaning that the oncoming French Cavalryman were converging so the bowmen ( a lot were Welsh, not just English) wouldn't just aim as a 'general carpet" fire but as a tight grouping. Secondly, the night or days before the battle, there was a lot of rain so the ground was very soft, compounded with the weight of the heavy armour the French Cavalryman were carry, it was extremely heavy going for the horses so their charge would be much slower than if it was done on harder ground. Effectively, this turned into a literal "turkey shoot". With the chaos which ensued, the Cavalrymen were dropping, not only on soft ground where it was very very difficult to get up but also on their own infantry/armed peasants. This all results in a chaotic, unorganized mass of French which was then routed....
Your infectious enthusiasm makes the description of the battle so vivid, Kevin. I am proud of all my fellow Englishmen who prevailed against the odds on St. Crispin's Day in October 1415, God bless 'em!
Man, I only found your channel a few weeks ago, but this is now one of my favorite history channels. The work you put into costumes, demonstrations, and models just shows you go the extra mile for your passions!
Wonderful storytelling ... I, as well as you, felt like I could see it all happening. I had to take a deep breath at the end of your story. A quick brandy and nap are now in order. Thank you, Cheers!!!
There's a tendency even today to look at weapons systems, ancient or modern, either as magic solutions or as total failures, and not as more or less effective tools working as part of a whole military system AND a set of circumstances. Your presentation didn't cause me to lose one whit of respect for the bow or the archers, but it colourfully illustrated the right way to look at the question. If only news people covering modern military technology were as clear-eyed.
The bow and arrow is one of the oldest weapons and has been adapted over the centuries for warfare,hunting and for competition.whilst a compound bow is good for accuracy,not much can match a longbow,or as my people (seminole)called it the big bow.we used a small bow for birding,fishing and for small game.we did not use horses,so a horse bow wasnt necessary.the big bow was used on elk,and other larger game. In Europe,the big bow was developed to give more power to the arrow,longbows,are six feet tall,and archers or yeomen were selected for height and weight.you need a great deal of strength to pull the drawstring back on one,especially repeatedly.used en mass they were deadly,dropped from a height.a knight in armour horse was no problem,the development of the bodkin arrowhead could be aimed to hit the horse behind the saddle,the knight unhorsed became vulnerable. Much exadderation ,myth and legend surrounds Agincourt,Cressey etc.so muddied are the facts.the best recorded example is Hastings.we have relics,Tapestries and armour from that time.many enlishmen were killed by arrows falling on their heads and shoulders.medieval warfare was a very very bloody business.
Thanks Tony, you might want to check out the Hundred Years War series I'm currently working through, here's the playlist 👍🏻 th-cam.com/play/PLZ5bkawra-DiRDbgOwOQAOcrWp6uP-uLz.html
OMG!! Thank you! I have always been a history buff, but the way you colour in the details is amazing, and so enlightining!! Oh how I had such a marvelous history teacher when I was a school boy!
Really enjoyed these insights into what it would’ve taken to charge into that arrow storm, and then to meet the men at arms waiting in the middle flanked by those lighter more maneuverable archers… wow.
Thank you for a wonderful description of Agincourt ! I have always felt proud of the English bowmen in whatever conflict that they took part but especially Crecy and Agincourt. They were true professionals.
Haha, I am not even into medieval history, but yet I find myself staring into this Kevin-guys eyes, unable to stop watching, unable to not click another video. You are one proper story teller sir. I imagine you have tranfixed a good number of people through your life. I am happy to have found your channel. Now I am off to find another one of your excellent vids. Greetings from Sweden! Jon
Thanks Justin, if you like Agincourt, you might want to follow the 100 Years War Series I'm working on, the playlist so far is below, I'm just about to start the Battle of Crecy and Agincourt will follow on down the line. 😉 th-cam.com/play/PLZ5bkawra-DiRDbgOwOQAOcrWp6uP-uLz.html
Would love to see a director like Ridley Scott do an Agincourt battle movie! Not as a minor backdrop or set piece about the King ( already done ), but with tactics, armor, weapons and the fighting men fleshed out more thoroughly!
Just discovered your channel and I absolutely love it. This really gets the mind and the imagination rolling while you describe the particular subject. Well done my friend.
First-time viewer, here Absolutely great! So many analysts get hung-up on the arrow-piercing-plate-armour issue. Instead, you've put the issue in terms of the larger context, providing a view of historical events, as I've never before seen! Thank you
Thanks Shel, you're right. I've just finished a video giving my thoughts on just that 'armoured piercing' topic specifically. It'll be up by the weekend. 👍🏻
Excellent lecture, it's so good to listen to someone who knows what he is talking about. You get these glib five minute history's, that are inaccurate & completely lack context, without any background to fill in the blanks. These are incredibe events that are hardly acknowledged in the modern day, as patriotic sentiments are frowned on. Of course being english it's always a joy to hear how we bested the French. I was recently reading up on Lord Nelson & some of the engagements with the French, he won several before trafalgar, but won is a understatement, he absolutely hammered the french, destroyed or captured their ships & their casualties were horrendous. Of course there is further context behind theses victories, it's what makes history so exciting.
Thank you for remembering the mud and that it would have hindered the mounted charge. It also hindered the unmounted knights that despite, or more accurately because of their armor, were mired down almost as bad as the mounted knights. It was a mess!
One analysis of the battle - Osprey's _Campaign_ booklet of the same name IIRC - pointed out that this was the same sticky mud that gave everyone in this sector such misery during the Great War.
Ƿes þu hal. You, Sir, have a gift for story telling! These videos end far too soon. This channel is rapidly becoming one of my favourites, along side the likes of Tod's Workshop, Scholagladiatoria, Modern History TV etc. Be well.
The English were greatly helped by the weather it had rained for a Week before the battle,many unhorsed knights actually drowned in the morass the knights on foot Sank. To their knees in the mud Making them easy for the lighter clad English to dispatch them Joe mcCallum
Enjoyed the straightforward but animated commentary. The bowman cause mayhem , which does wonders for unsettling the nerves. The amount of pointed hail falling from the sky, nothing was going to be a slam dunk.
Thank you Kevin for this wonderful insight in a historical epic battle! Enjoyed every bit of your tale. Wished we were at a hearths fire with a good roast and a nice whiskey! Cheers mate!
I only came across your channel tonight. Fascinating stuff. Excellent audio and visual. I've just subscribed and I'm looking forward to digging out more!
I stumbled onto this channel, watched the video and subscribed. I think you captured the visceral experience of what the battle would have been like for the participants.
Hi Kelly, thanks for the sub, it's appreciated 👍🏻 You might also like the Hundred Years War series I'm currently doing. th-cam.com/video/BDugcgtGmxQ/w-d-xo.html
the arrows did something that gets ignored or forgotten frequently but is a big part of the army even to this day: they were psychological. arrows blocking out the sun, forcing cavalry to retreat or be slaughtered by the bowmen, then causing troops to avoid those fleeing cavalry. it was a huge impact on how soldiers fought, fear can breakdown even the best training
A great presentation! Here’s an idea for a show: tell us how the weapons and armor kit changed from Crecy to Agincourt. And, how the tactics changed on both sides. Cheers!
Jason Kingsley from Modern History TV (TH-cam) does some very good explanations and demonstrations of the very things Kevin describes here regarding knights in combat. Highly recommend. Another great video. You really bring things alive with your descriptions and story telling!
I certainly enjoyed this video, thank you. I have a better understanding now of the longbow as an ingredient of the battle rather than the main course. Where it may have lacked in lethal penetration, it excelled in sewing chaos from a distance and breaking up cavalry charges. The vaunted mounted armored knight would become very vulnerable when his mount was pelted with arrows and driven mad onto a pike. Trying to regain one's bearings in the mud while wearing a suit of armor and being swarmed by lightly armored men at arms sounds like a pretty bad day.
Kevin you answered a question. Longbowmen did arc fire and rain some of their arrows. Some very serious reinactors say only direct fire was used. This based on contemporary pictures of Agincourt. However even direct fire arrows won't penetrate armour unless you hit a gap of some kind. However knights loaded down in armour if you hit their horse would fall or throw their rider. Well if you can imagine being thrown in the air and landing bouncing along. That could kill or injure you. Then there are the archers who would be right on a fallen Knight.
Really great answers and logical support for your views! These are questions all military historians and students of military science and martial arts should be asking, and striving to understand. You have answered many questions I have had for a long time, and I love your presentations; they are obviously a labor of love from an exceptionally analytical and intelligent mind. You are a natural, and gifted teacher!
The bowmen only had to drop a few, or have the mud do it for them - look at fatal crowd incidents - close packed, moving at speed, ones in the second line falling over the stricken themselves. There's videos of chaos spreading like a wave through a crowd once there is an obstruction.
I am going for the muddy field. The heavy horses carrying all that weight would have sunk and lost all attack speed. The French infantry copped the arrows and left the knights unsupported.
Let’s be real, you knock someone off their horse in front, there was a good chance the arrow didn’t kill them but the 20 charging horses behind them got the job done.
@@fieryjalapenos4442 Not like falling down in infantry fighting was any better. Ya know what Classical Greek hoplite spears had those pointy butt ferrules for...? Medieval European cavalry however did not fight in deep formations - that was an Eastern thing, maneuverability was a lot bigger deal in mounted combat over there (partly because battlefields tended to be more open). They formed up in long thin lines to maximise lance shock frontage which had the coincidential benefit of limiting the disruption caused by falling mounts; real bitch to maneuver though just like the infantry lines of the musket-and-bayonet era (which followed the same logic to maximise _fire_ frontage and incidentally limit casualties from artillery).
Thank you for a wonderful explanation! I really enjoy your way of telling the tale of history! It becomes real! Did you teach history at one time? In the 60s I had a professor whose father had been a federal judge here in NC USA. This professor told us of his life and the history he had seen. I usually forgot to take notes! He, just as you are, was enthralling!
Yes, I’ve taught history in schools for over 25 years, but never as a ‘teacher’, always as a freelance. I must have taught in almost 1000 schools over the years. 😊 Thanks for your kind words
There's not a single video that i have seen so far being a dissapointment, my absolute respect for this man and his passionate take on History, specially the military one Ps: May i beg for a video of some spanish history? ;)
Awesome content Kevin. I collect arms and armor from the 1500’s I’m especially proud of a close helmet that I own. My heads a little too big to close it but it fits my 23 year old son perfectly. Can’t imagine fighting with all that steel on looking through that narrow slit. My helmet is German and it’s got many contact marks. I wish it could talk.
Wow, that's amazing. When I worked at Warwick Castle, I tried on a couple of 15th Century helmets and as you say they're very uncomfortable and difficult to see through but the one I cherished trying on was none other than Oliver Cromwell's helmet, but hidden away was some of the garrison armour from the Eng Civil War and some of these pots were converted from medieval helmets. Thanks for watching and your comment
@@thehistorysquad thank you I’m a subscriber now. I visited the Edinburgh Castle in 2019 when I took a tour of Great Britain for 10 days. They have an awesome arms and armor collection. Can’t wait to go back after Covid is all over. My family Scott comes from the border lands so I plan on renting a car and driving around the border area. But I really liked being able to go see Great Britain. I’m the first of my family to travel back since my ancestors came to America. I can’t describe the feeling I felt when I stepped on Scottish soil for the first time.
@@craigthescott5074 I visited Edinburgh Castle when I was in the army, my mate and I got so drunk we somehow ended up waking up on the roof of the Castle 😳, it was a bloody long way up
Great narrative sir! I wonder if the plentitude of the heavy shafts used at the time, stuck in the ground after the loose would be a contributing factor to the chaos as a trip hazard.
You have certainly earned me as a subscriber. With my surname being “Bowman” I could hardly do anything else really. Still in the northeast with roots in Northumberland and Durham. Thank you I look forward To catching up.
Great, thanks! Stand by for the Battle of Neville's Cross, it'll be coming shortly after Crecy in the Hundred Years War series. I appreciate your sub 👍🏻
The accounts that I have read claim that the mounted French nobles pushed to the front and were therefore backed by many mounted sargents and mounted non nobles crowding them further into the tight killing ground and that the ground fell away to some degree left and right, adding mud just made things worse. I always greatly appreciate your presentations giving me an opportunity to walk a little in their shoes. Genetically these all had to be a much tougher and more resilient breed than now. Just fascinating. Thanks again
Great to hear it from someone who knows what he's talking about, even if it's very slightly elaborated upon by his great grandfather who was really there. Thanks for the insights Kevin 😉
@@davepowell7168: Sorry! I obviously missed the jest vs the joust! Or the joust vs the jest! And you may forget the 'sir'! I am in little need of assistance, in being reminded of my age! 🙄
One thing that really made me think what battle was like was watching reenactments with people in full armor, both plate and chainmail. Fit healthy people reduced to collapsing after 10-15 minutes of fighting. Simply running across a 100 meters of open space exhausted many. The idea of fights going on "all day" I image was much more people running in, fighting for a short time running back off, catching breath, running back in, running back. more a relay then a continual slogging match. With fresh soldiers pushing though from the back and exhausted soldiers falling to the back and then moving forward again in a continual rotation. A much more messy affair than we see in films, a long painful exhausting grind, wearing down the enemy than it was the swashbuckling sword play the films portray.
Yes, thanks for your comment. Many of the battles were actually very short indeed. Crecy was longer because of the breaks between the charges, but that's for part 4/5 of the Hundred Years War series. 👍🏻
Infantry clashes could go on for quite a while but obviously involved lots of disengagement and breath-catching before getting back to it. But to give an illustration what kind of thermos bottle full armour with the associated padding is, take Battle of Towton (1460) where AFAIK many men-at-arms collapsed from heat exhaustion. It was fought _in heavy snowfall._
I think a key aspect was the shrapnel effect from a arrow hitting armour head on. Upon impact a modern archer proved that even if the arrow didn't pierce it could potentially splinter and slip under the helmet or into the various weak points.
Came back to watch this after your recent video about Agincourt to get more context about the English archers. Seen so many misunderstanding people have about archers in fantasy and gaming. As an archer myself, I keep telling people, for someone who could easily pull a bow of a hundred pounds or more...you don't want to get into melee with that person. He could easily wring out your guts with his bare hands.
I watched a tv doc some years ago, when actor (and longbow expert) Robert Hardy and colleagues demonstrated the power of the longbow.....with the tip they used, it could penetrate chain mail easily.
That's right, arrows will go through chainmail for sure. I've tested this in the past and when the snow clears, I plan to do another test for the channel Thanks for watching. 👍🏻
Very well presented. Everyone seems to forget that in the three great Longbow battles, Crecy, Poitier and Agincourt the armored knights made it to the English line and the battle was decided hand to hand! Very rare that we hear of a higher ranking Chevalier actually killed by an arrow, or a lance for that matter.
Everyone seems to forget? The idea that the longbowmen played only a small role in the big battles of the hundred years war has been the revisionist position for at least a decade now, even though it suffers from at least as many problems as the traditional view.
It’s kind of ironic that the cream of French chivalry was defeated by pointed sticks. Certainly state of the art plate armour was proof against arrows, it was proof against fire arms for long enough. However their horses weren’t and as you mentioned once they turned tail they were vulnerable. You didn’t talk about the men at arms. ‘heavy infantry’, that followed the cavalry charge. They had to plow through a sea of mud top soil underlayed with clay and a chalk substrate churned up by the horses to be met by their equals and the archers. Any one who has had to walk through that stuff will know. It’s like glue. They would have been like flies in amber. The same mud created the impasse in 1914-18 and many died in the same way six hundred years later. Drowned,held, trapped by the very land they coveted or protected.
@@tedwarden5803 "Certainly state of the art plate armour was proof against arrows, it was proof against fire arms for long enough." Probably the most thorough testing done on this has been done by Tod of Tod's Workshop. According to that the thickest armour on the best quality breastplate could defeat longbow arrows. But he also accidentally pierced a contemporary helmet with the same arrows, and has openly questioned whether the less thick sections of armour, or poorer quality armour, would fare as well.
@@Matt_Alaric. Again I would agree with your point. But at the start of the battle would it not be volley fire? I’m certain that many of those guys could shoot the eye out a needle at a hundred yards but was that what they were trying to do? Intimate I would guess. I’ve certainly got more questions than answers on this subject. Henry certainly chose his ground and chose it well. A majority of the ‘French’ forces failed to follow up. As a result of the Politics of the time. Henry’s claim to the French crown was not without some legally. And even more so to Burgundy and some of what is now western France. The English army again as far as I remember was in a pretty poor state. It had been marching for months full of dysentery and probably worse. They crossed the river by luck and necessity. They had no other option. They reached their chosen ground and slaughtered a superior enemy. Luck, judgement I don’t know. But I’m fairly sure it was the English army’s last throw.
Hmmm, interesting question. I think I'd like to have been one of John Hawkwood's men at Crecy and then following him down into Italy as a Free Company man. But part of me pulls in another direction WW1, what shines from that conflict above all else is the comradeship.
Hi Kevin, great video! Would you consider doing a reaction video on historically accurate (or innaccurate) medieval tv shows or movies such as The Hollow crown, Henry V, Monty Python, etc? Would love to hear your insight or comments on the medieval era portrayed in media.
Thank you for this Kevin. Many ppl think that the bow won the battle on its own mowing down armoured knights like a hot knife going through butter. This simply is not true. Did the bows contribute in a significant manor? 100% yes otherwise the English would not have fielded so many battle after battle if they were not effective. But the reality is more complicated The bow was effective in numbers and in volleys where 1/100 arrows might penetrate and injure or kill a knight. Well when you have 5000 archers these 1/100 shots add up. It’s a numbers game. To add to this when you know that 1/100 arrows might hit an area on the knight that is not encased in plate, like an armpit, knee/elbow joint etc that is protected my mail or gambeson, this is where the draw weight of the bow counts. The higher draw weight of the bow will ensure that when these “lucky shots” occur they will penetrate to depths that are more likely to cause incapacitating or lethal damage compared to a lower draw weight bow. After all mail and gambeson is still decent armour that needs force to be defeated. Additionally Like Kevin stated, bowmen were professional soldiers and after they exhausted their arrows they drew their side arms and entered the melee. They would have killed many Frenchmen in melee. So the victory at Agincourt can be attributed to many strategies and weapon systems including the English Warbow which is a great weapon during this time.
![Sluys, the bloodiest sea battle | Hundred Years War [Episode 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7-rvinEQ7qo/mqdefault.jpg)
![Sluys, the bloodiest sea battle | Hundred Years War [Episode 2]](/img/tr.png)
So great to see the last survivor of Agincourt recounting his experiences. Looking good for 600....
Hahaha
For 600 years archers I have trained
Funny doesn’t look very Yoda-ey
Well put. I think the mistake so many people make is in defining effective as “killing.” All the longbows have to do is disrupt the French charge enough so that when it hits the English line it is on disarray and doesn’t hit with the force it otherwise would have. This has been the one of main purposes of missile weapons throughout history- the Roman Pilum, the Frankish Francisca etc.- if they kill some people, great, but wound, take out shields, create gaps in the line, create disarray, as well as the psychological factor- that is why missile weapons work in battles, even if they don’t necessarily kill a bunch of the enemy outright. And also like you mention, the archers can direct the French where they want the French to go by making certain approaches less favorable. Combine that with a smart use of topography and perhaps a lucky muddy field of battle that also slows a cavalry charge, and like you say, you have the perfect storm.
Thanks for watching. Your comments are bang on & appreciated 👍🏻
The battle of patay is an example of what can happen if when the arrows don’t disrupt the enemy. A comparatively small number of French knights defeated a significantly larger English force consisting of mostly bowmen.
It never really occurred to me that the real purpose of the long bow was to create panic and confusion, so obvious now you point it out.
Thank you 👍
Two main advantages that the British had in the battle was firstly, the flanks of the battlefield were trees, the direction was such that it was a sort of a funnel shape meaning that the oncoming French Cavalryman were converging so the bowmen ( a lot were Welsh, not just English) wouldn't just aim as a 'general carpet" fire but as a tight grouping. Secondly, the night or days before the battle, there was a lot of rain so the ground was very soft, compounded with the weight of the heavy armour the French Cavalryman were carry, it was extremely heavy going for the horses so their charge would be much slower than if it was done on harder ground. Effectively, this turned into a literal "turkey shoot". With the chaos which ensued, the Cavalrymen were dropping, not only on soft ground where it was very very difficult to get up but also on their own infantry/armed peasants. This all results in a chaotic, unorganized mass of French which was then routed....
Thanks Mr Biscuit Barrel, demonstrating the value of a classical education.
Ole!
Your infectious enthusiasm makes the description of the battle so vivid, Kevin. I am proud of all my fellow Englishmen who prevailed against the odds on St. Crispin's Day in October 1415, God bless 'em!
Cheers Pete and yes, Gawd bless 'em 👍🏻
Man, I only found your channel a few weeks ago, but this is now one of my favorite history channels. The work you put into costumes, demonstrations, and models just shows you go the extra mile for your passions!
Cheers Colby, I appreciate that 👍🏻
Take that history channel!
Straight and to the point with no interviews to "scholars" and no commercials.
Haha, thanks Esmerelda, glad you enjoyed it. 👍🏻
This channel should have 1 million+ subscribers. Abseloutly delightful to watch.
Wow, that's kind thank you, we'll keep trying 👍🏻
Wonderful storytelling ... I, as well as you, felt like I could see it all happening. I had to take a deep breath at the end of your story. A quick brandy and nap are now in order. Thank you, Cheers!!!
Pour me one will you.......no ice 😜
I used to watch you at Sherwood Forest as a kid you really got me interested in archery and the long bow
Glad your still producing content
Excellent, thanks David. I really miss Sherwood.
I went to Sherwood when I was 5/6 it would have been 2000/2001. I was the small rascal shooting left right and center with my plastic bow 🤣
@@GWB184 Excellent 👍🏻
There's a tendency even today to look at weapons systems, ancient or modern, either as magic solutions or as total failures, and not as more or less effective tools working as part of a whole military system AND a set of circumstances. Your presentation didn't cause me to lose one whit of respect for the bow or the archers, but it colourfully illustrated the right way to look at the question. If only news people covering modern military technology were as clear-eyed.
Thank you, your comment is appreciated 👍🏻
The bow and arrow is one of the oldest weapons and has been adapted over the centuries for warfare,hunting and for competition.whilst a compound bow is good for accuracy,not much can match a longbow,or as my people (seminole)called it the big bow.we used a small bow for birding,fishing and for small game.we did not use horses,so a horse bow wasnt necessary.the big bow was used on elk,and other larger game.
In Europe,the big bow was developed to give more power to the arrow,longbows,are six feet tall,and archers or yeomen were selected for height and weight.you need a great deal of strength to pull the drawstring back on one,especially repeatedly.used en mass they were deadly,dropped from a height.a knight in armour horse was no problem,the development of the bodkin arrowhead could be aimed to hit the horse behind the saddle,the knight unhorsed became vulnerable.
Much exadderation ,myth and legend surrounds Agincourt,Cressey etc.so muddied are the facts.the best recorded example is Hastings.we have relics,Tapestries and armour from that time.many enlishmen were killed by arrows falling on their heads and shoulders.medieval warfare was a very very bloody business.
News people's job is not to show us the facts, but to carry out the propaganda of Governments, Intelligence Services and Multinational Companies.
That was the best explanation of the French defeat that I've heard.
It made sense.
Thanks Tony, you might want to check out the Hundred Years War series I'm currently working through, here's the playlist 👍🏻
th-cam.com/play/PLZ5bkawra-DiRDbgOwOQAOcrWp6uP-uLz.html
A tale well told, sir! I feel as if I saw the whole thing with my own eyes.
Thank you 👍
Nice one Kevin, your storytelling puts us there at the time, awesome 🏹
Glad you enjoyed it
Love how you’re making us think about what went on, not only telling us. It’s great!
What a delight to watch, dramatic and emotive storytelling at it's best. You deserve that cuppa!
Cheers! Josey Wales, one of my favourite cowboy movies, based on the book "Gone to Texas' 👍🏻
OMG!! Thank you! I have always been a history buff, but the way you colour in the details is amazing, and so enlightining!! Oh how I had such a marvelous history teacher when I was a school boy!
Wow, thank you! Glad you enjoyed it - stay tuned for more ;-)
Really enjoyed these insights into what it would’ve taken to charge into that arrow storm, and then to meet the men at arms waiting in the middle flanked by those lighter more maneuverable archers… wow.
Really enjoyed your descriptive narrative, I could visualise the intensity of the battle
Thanks 👍🏻
Thank you for a wonderful description of Agincourt !
I have always felt proud of the English bowmen in whatever conflict that they took part but especially Crecy and Agincourt. They were true professionals.
love to hear your passion for the bowmen, cheers kevin, enjoyed the show
One of those legendary battles but told without the mysticism great vid Kevin
Kevin , the way you tell history is so entertaining. You give a good perspective of the battle . I could watch your TH-cam channel all day .
Thanks buddy, that's appreciated 👍🏻
Haha, I am not even into medieval history, but yet I find myself staring into this Kevin-guys eyes, unable to stop watching, unable to not click another video. You are one proper story teller sir. I imagine you have tranfixed a good number of people through your life. I am happy to have found your channel. Now I am off to find another one of your excellent vids.
Greetings from Sweden!
Jon
Wow, thanks Jon! And thanks for subscribing 👍🏻
Absolutely brilliant description of what happened. Always been fascinated by Agincourt
Thanks Justin, if you like Agincourt, you might want to follow the 100 Years War Series I'm working on, the playlist so far is below, I'm just about to start the Battle of Crecy and Agincourt will follow on down the line. 😉
th-cam.com/play/PLZ5bkawra-DiRDbgOwOQAOcrWp6uP-uLz.html
Would love to see a director like Ridley Scott do an Agincourt battle movie! Not as a minor backdrop or set piece about the King ( already done ), but with tactics, armor, weapons and the fighting men fleshed out more thoroughly!
Just discovered your channel and I absolutely love it. This really gets the mind and the imagination rolling while you describe the particular subject. Well done my friend.
Excellent, thanks. Glad you're enjoying it - there's lots more to come 👍🏻
Kevin, you make me feel good about the world. I love your videos.😊
You're like that history teacher all the freshmen kids hope they get the next year. You make learning very cool. Thank you so much for the channel.
LOL, thanks very much 👍🏻
Kevin the passion throughout the telling of the story was powerful. Great video and thanks for sharing. :D
First-time viewer, here
Absolutely great! So many analysts get hung-up on the arrow-piercing-plate-armour issue. Instead, you've put the issue in terms of the larger context, providing a view of historical events, as I've never before seen!
Thank you
Thanks Shel, you're right. I've just finished a video giving my thoughts on just that 'armoured piercing' topic specifically. It'll be up by the weekend. 👍🏻
It must have been horrible for all concerned.
Your ability to set the scene is so unique. Thanks again
Excellent lecture, it's so good to listen to someone who knows what he is talking about.
You get these glib five minute history's, that are inaccurate & completely lack context, without any background to fill in the blanks.
These are incredibe events that are hardly acknowledged in the modern day, as patriotic sentiments are frowned on.
Of course being english it's always a joy to hear how we bested the French.
I was recently reading up on Lord Nelson & some of the engagements with the French, he won several before trafalgar, but won is a understatement, he absolutely hammered the french, destroyed or captured their ships & their casualties were horrendous. Of course there is further context behind theses victories, it's what makes history so exciting.
Thanks for watching Shaun 👍🏻
You know Nelson's statue in Trafalgar Square is 3x his life size, which makes it an horatio of 3:1 😂
Thank you, this was enlightening and profound and now it makes all sense.
I recommend watching Tod's Workshop's videos and testing... also good conversation with Toby Capwell.
For sure Tod has a great channel. I hope you've enjoyed watching this channel too though 👍🏻
@@thehistorysquad Indeed I have. I meant specifically the Tod vids about longbows and Agincourt. The testing was pretty thorough and extensive.
Thank you for remembering the mud and that it would have hindered the mounted charge. It also hindered the unmounted knights that despite, or more accurately because of their armor, were mired down almost as bad as the mounted knights. It was a mess!
It certainly was, thanks for watching Leo 👍🏻
In ancient times people got payed to do mud fighting and in modern you must pay to see mud fighting 😉😁
One analysis of the battle - Osprey's _Campaign_ booklet of the same name IIRC - pointed out that this was the same sticky mud that gave everyone in this sector such misery during the Great War.
Ƿes þu hal.
You, Sir, have a gift for story telling! These videos end far too soon.
This channel is rapidly becoming one of my favourites, along side the likes of Tod's Workshop, Scholagladiatoria, Modern History TV etc.
Be well.
Thank you kindly 👍🏻
The English were greatly helped by the weather it had rained for a
Week before the battle,many unhorsed knights actually drowned in the morass the knights on foot
Sank. To their knees in the mud
Making them easy for the lighter clad English to dispatch them
Joe mcCallum
Great presentation!! Perfect holistic analysis!! Love the passion you have for history!!
Thanks Sarge, glad you liked it!
Yeah,the people who in vented the longbow.
You tell a great story mate. I felt like I was there. TBH I didn't knew about the bowman's dagger. But it makes perfect sense.
Cheers Bill
Quite new to your content, and every video so far as been nothing short of entertaining. Bravo.
Glad you've enjoyed them Owen, thank you! 👍🏻
Enjoyed the straightforward but animated commentary. The bowman cause mayhem , which does wonders for unsettling the nerves. The amount of pointed hail falling from the sky, nothing was going to be a slam dunk.
I have just found your channel an so glad.
I remember be inspired by you as the Warwick bowman
I now shoot an English long bow at my local club
Well Hi Jo, and welcome to the channel. I'm glad I helped you take up the longbow ;-)
Wonderful stuff. I've always loved Kevin's longbow videos. Interesting insight into the battle. I've subscribed. Flaxen Saxon.
Thank you Flaxen Saxon, there's plenty more to come. 👍🏻
Thank you Kevin for this wonderful insight in a historical epic battle! Enjoyed every bit of your tale. Wished we were at a hearths fire with a good roast and a nice whiskey! Cheers mate!
Cheers Pat!
nicely described account of what probably happened
I only came across your channel tonight. Fascinating stuff. Excellent audio and visual. I've just subscribed and I'm
looking forward to digging out more!
Thanks and welcome aboard, they'll be lots more to come as well
I stumbled onto this channel, watched the video and subscribed.
I think you captured the visceral experience of what the battle would have been like for the participants.
Hi Kelly, thanks for the sub, it's appreciated 👍🏻
You might also like the Hundred Years War series I'm currently doing. th-cam.com/video/BDugcgtGmxQ/w-d-xo.html
Always enjoyed your talks at Warwick.Love this channel.
Cheers Paul, much appreciated.
the arrows did something that gets ignored or forgotten frequently but is a big part of the army even to this day: they were psychological. arrows blocking out the sun, forcing cavalry to retreat or be slaughtered by the bowmen, then causing troops to avoid those fleeing cavalry. it was a huge impact on how soldiers fought, fear can breakdown even the best training
A great presentation!
Here’s an idea for a show: tell us how the weapons and armor kit changed from Crecy to Agincourt. And, how the tactics changed on both sides.
Cheers!
I'll give it some thought 👍🏻
Another great story. Thanks Kev n Julie :-)
Jason Kingsley from Modern History TV (TH-cam) does some very good explanations and demonstrations of the very things Kevin describes here regarding knights in combat. Highly recommend.
Another great video. You really bring things alive with your descriptions and story telling!
I certainly enjoyed this video, thank you. I have a better understanding now of the longbow as an ingredient of the battle rather than the main course. Where it may have lacked in lethal penetration, it excelled in sewing chaos from a distance and breaking up cavalry charges. The vaunted mounted armored knight would become very vulnerable when his mount was pelted with arrows and driven mad onto a pike. Trying to regain one's bearings in the mud while wearing a suit of armor and being swarmed by lightly armored men at arms sounds like a pretty bad day.
Kevin you answered a question. Longbowmen did arc fire and rain some of their arrows. Some very serious reinactors say only direct fire was used. This based on contemporary pictures of Agincourt. However even direct fire arrows won't penetrate armour unless you hit a gap of some kind. However knights loaded down in armour if you hit their horse would fall or throw their rider. Well if you can imagine being thrown in the air and landing bouncing along. That could kill or injure you. Then there are the archers who would be right on a fallen Knight.
Really great answers and logical support for your views! These are questions all military historians and students of military science and martial arts should be asking, and striving to understand. You have answered many questions I have had for a long time, and I love your presentations; they are obviously a labor of love from an exceptionally analytical and intelligent mind. You are a natural, and gifted teacher!
Gosh, wow, a lovely accolade, thank you, & thanks for watching. I just love history and I guess it shines through.
Fascinating analysis. Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching 👍🏻
Excellent narrative! I was right there in the thick of it.
Cheers Crusty, take a look at the Hundred Years War series too, there's lots of battle stuff coming up in there 👍🏻
You paint a picture with your excellent description. I could see everything. I just subscribed.
Well thank you! Much appreciated. 👍🏻
Thank you for bringing the battle to life. Love it, from south africa
Cheers Jeff, you're welcome!
Well said. Thanks for sharing.
The bowmen only had to drop a few, or have the mud do it for them - look at fatal crowd incidents - close packed, moving at speed, ones in the second line falling over the stricken themselves. There's videos of chaos spreading like a wave through a crowd once there is an obstruction.
Absolutely agreed 👍🏻 good comment, thanks.
I am going for the muddy field. The heavy horses carrying all that weight would have sunk and lost all attack speed. The French infantry copped the arrows and left the knights unsupported.
Let’s be real, you knock someone off their horse in front, there was a good chance the arrow didn’t kill them but the 20 charging horses behind them got the job done.
@@fieryjalapenos4442 Not like falling down in infantry fighting was any better. Ya know what Classical Greek hoplite spears had those pointy butt ferrules for...?
Medieval European cavalry however did not fight in deep formations - that was an Eastern thing, maneuverability was a lot bigger deal in mounted combat over there (partly because battlefields tended to be more open). They formed up in long thin lines to maximise lance shock frontage which had the coincidential benefit of limiting the disruption caused by falling mounts; real bitch to maneuver though just like the infantry lines of the musket-and-bayonet era (which followed the same logic to maximise _fire_ frontage and incidentally limit casualties from artillery).
2 vids watched and I can already say I wish I had subscribed on the first. Well done!
Cheers David, I appreciate it. 👍🏻
Thank you for a wonderful explanation! I really enjoy your way of telling the tale of history! It becomes real! Did you teach history at one time? In the 60s I had a professor whose father had been a federal judge here in NC USA. This professor told us of his life and the history he had seen. I usually forgot to take notes! He, just as you are, was enthralling!
Yes, I’ve taught history in schools for over 25 years, but never as a ‘teacher’, always as a freelance. I must have taught in almost 1000 schools over the years. 😊
Thanks for your kind words
There's not a single video that i have seen so far being a dissapointment, my absolute respect for this man and his passionate take on History, specially the military one
Ps: May i beg for a video of some spanish history? ;)
Yes, eventually I'll get to some Spanish history, it's on my list already 😉
Fascinating stuff! I really did enjoy learning something I had never even thought about.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching 👍🏻
Well done sir. A beautiful and realistic description.
Thank you kindly!
Awesome content Kevin. I collect arms and armor from the 1500’s I’m especially proud of a close helmet that I own. My heads a little too big to close it but it fits my 23 year old son perfectly. Can’t imagine fighting with all that steel on looking through that narrow slit. My helmet is German and it’s got many contact marks. I wish it could talk.
Wow, that's amazing. When I worked at Warwick Castle, I tried on a couple of 15th Century helmets and as you say they're very uncomfortable and difficult to see through but the one I cherished trying on was none other than Oliver Cromwell's helmet, but hidden away was some of the garrison armour from the Eng Civil War and some of these pots were converted from medieval helmets. Thanks for watching and your comment
@@thehistorysquad thank you I’m a subscriber now. I visited the Edinburgh Castle in 2019 when I took a tour of Great Britain for 10 days. They have an awesome arms and armor collection. Can’t wait to go back after Covid is all over. My family Scott comes from the border lands so I plan on renting a car and driving around the border area. But I really liked being able to go see Great Britain. I’m the first of my family to travel back since my ancestors came to America. I can’t describe the feeling I felt when I stepped on Scottish soil for the first time.
@@craigthescott5074 I visited Edinburgh Castle when I was in the army, my mate and I got so drunk we somehow ended up waking up on the roof of the Castle 😳, it was a bloody long way up
@@thehistorysquad great story.
Short and sweet! Well done.
Glad you enjoyed it
Great narrative sir! I wonder if the plentitude of the heavy shafts used at the time, stuck in the ground after the loose would be a contributing factor to the chaos as a trip hazard.
Quite possibly 😉
I recently subscribed to your channel and i must say that i REALLY enjoy your videos! Cheers from Greece,my good Sir...😁
Thanks and welcome 👍🏻
Loved this episode, sir!
You have certainly earned me as a subscriber. With my surname being “Bowman” I could hardly do anything else really.
Still in the northeast with roots in Northumberland and Durham.
Thank you I look forward To catching up.
Great, thanks! Stand by for the Battle of Neville's Cross, it'll be coming shortly after Crecy in the Hundred Years War series.
I appreciate your sub 👍🏻
I could feel the hair on the back of my neck rising. I've watched uploads on Agincourt and it always triggers me. Thanks for the upload and buzz. :-)
You're very welcome
The accounts that I have read claim that the mounted French nobles pushed to the front and were therefore backed by many mounted sargents and mounted non nobles crowding them further into the tight killing ground and that the ground fell away to some degree left and right, adding mud just made things worse. I always greatly appreciate your presentations giving me an opportunity to walk a little in their shoes. Genetically these all had to be a much tougher and more resilient breed than now. Just fascinating. Thanks again
That's right Jon, & I'd agree with you 👍🏻
Excellent..... Thank you for such an honest appraisal. 👍
My pleasure, thanks for watching.
Great to hear it from someone who knows what he's talking about, even if it's very slightly elaborated upon by his great grandfather who was really there. Thanks for the insights Kevin 😉
Thought it was his dad! 🤣
I suspect it would have been a good few 'greats' prior to his grandfather, to have borne witness to Agincourt!
@@jallan9578 Jest not Joust Sir..
@@davepowell7168:
Sorry!
I obviously missed the jest vs the joust!
Or the joust vs the jest!
And you may forget the 'sir'! I am in little need of assistance, in being reminded of my age! 🙄
@@jallan9578 Being retired myself l can't remember you, we met at Agincourt ? I was less forgetful when Harry wotsit was king.
What happened to the Welsh bow men , did they go for a pint , there were over 500 there somewhere, not a mention
Haha! Bloody wonderful! Very well done as always!
Thank you kindly!
What a great guy
You sir BRING HISTORY ALIVE..
Thanks Brian, you're very kind.
One thing that really made me think what battle was like was watching reenactments with people in full armor, both plate and chainmail. Fit healthy people reduced to collapsing after 10-15 minutes of fighting. Simply running across a 100 meters of open space exhausted many.
The idea of fights going on "all day" I image was much more people running in, fighting for a short time running back off, catching breath, running back in, running back. more a relay then a continual slogging match. With fresh soldiers pushing though from the back and exhausted soldiers falling to the back and then moving forward again in a continual rotation.
A much more messy affair than we see in films, a long painful exhausting grind, wearing down the enemy than it was the swashbuckling sword play the films portray.
Yes, thanks for your comment. Many of the battles were actually very short indeed. Crecy was longer because of the breaks between the charges, but that's for part 4/5 of the Hundred Years War series. 👍🏻
Infantry clashes could go on for quite a while but obviously involved lots of disengagement and breath-catching before getting back to it.
But to give an illustration what kind of thermos bottle full armour with the associated padding is, take Battle of Towton (1460) where AFAIK many men-at-arms collapsed from heat exhaustion.
It was fought _in heavy snowfall._
Brilliant! Thank you...
You're most welcome - thanks for watching.
New subscribers, I enjoyed your enthusiasm.
Thanks and welcome
Good show, Kevin! Crack on!
Cheers!
I love how impassioned and heated you get while telling a story!
history brought to life thank you
You're welcome, glad you enjoyed it 👍🏻
Best TH-cam handle ever ..
My History CIC was called Team history …
well deserved cup of tee! Thanks
I think a key aspect was the shrapnel effect from a arrow hitting armour head on. Upon impact a modern archer proved that even if the arrow didn't pierce it could potentially splinter and slip under the helmet or into the various weak points.
That's right Jack, just like in Henry V's case at Shrewsbury 👍🏻
Thanks Kevin, don’t get too excited 👌😁👏👏👏👏❤️
Came back to watch this after your recent video about Agincourt to get more context about the English archers.
Seen so many misunderstanding people have about archers in fantasy and gaming. As an archer myself, I keep telling people, for someone who could easily pull a bow of a hundred pounds or more...you don't want to get into melee with that person. He could easily wring out your guts with his bare hands.
V good illustration !
V convincing !
🤣
I watched a tv doc some years ago, when actor (and longbow expert) Robert Hardy and colleagues demonstrated the power of the longbow.....with the tip they used, it could penetrate chain mail easily.
That's right, arrows will go through chainmail for sure. I've tested this in the past and when the snow clears, I plan to do another test for the channel
Thanks for watching. 👍🏻
First time watching you really enjoyed that thanks
Awesome, thanks Penny!
Very well presented. Everyone seems to forget that in the three great Longbow battles, Crecy, Poitier and Agincourt the armored knights made it to the English line and the battle was decided hand to hand! Very rare that we hear of a higher ranking Chevalier actually killed by an arrow, or a lance for that matter.
Great comment, thanks for watching. 👍🏻
Everyone seems to forget? The idea that the longbowmen played only a small role in the big battles of the hundred years war has been the revisionist position for at least a decade now, even though it suffers from at least as many problems as the traditional view.
It’s kind of ironic that the cream of French chivalry was defeated by pointed sticks.
Certainly state of the art plate armour was proof against arrows, it was proof against fire arms for long enough.
However their horses weren’t and as you mentioned once they turned tail they were vulnerable.
You didn’t talk about the men at arms. ‘heavy infantry’, that followed the cavalry charge.
They had to plow through a sea of mud top soil underlayed with clay and a chalk substrate churned up by the horses to be met by their equals and the archers.
Any one who has had to walk through that stuff will know. It’s like glue. They would have been like flies in amber.
The same mud created the impasse in 1914-18 and many died in the same way six hundred years later. Drowned,held, trapped by the very land they coveted or protected.
@@tedwarden5803 "Certainly state of the art plate armour was proof against arrows, it was proof against fire arms for long enough."
Probably the most thorough testing done on this has been done by Tod of Tod's Workshop. According to that the thickest armour on the best quality breastplate could defeat longbow arrows. But he also accidentally pierced a contemporary helmet with the same arrows, and has openly questioned whether the less thick sections of armour, or poorer quality armour, would fare as well.
@@Matt_Alaric. Again I would agree with your point. But at the start of the battle would it not be volley fire?
I’m certain that many of those guys could shoot the eye out a needle at a hundred yards but was that what they were trying to do? Intimate I would guess.
I’ve certainly got more questions than answers on this subject.
Henry certainly chose his ground and chose it well.
A majority of the ‘French’ forces failed to follow up. As a result of the Politics of the time. Henry’s claim to the French crown was not without some legally.
And even more so to Burgundy and some of what is now western France.
The English army again as far as I remember was in a pretty poor state. It had been marching for months full of dysentery and probably worse.
They crossed the river by luck and necessity. They had no other option.
They reached their chosen ground and slaughtered a superior enemy.
Luck, judgement I don’t know.
But I’m fairly sure it was the English army’s last throw.
Thanks for posting this. I have subscribed.
Thanks for the sub David - much appreciated 👍🏻
If you could live in any time period, which would it be?
Hmmm, interesting question. I think I'd like to have been one of John Hawkwood's men at Crecy and then following him down into Italy as a Free Company man. But part of me pulls in another direction WW1, what shines from that conflict above all else is the comradeship.
Finally a correct narrative on a cavalry charge. It was the same for thousands of years. The gallop was saved for the end. Thank you sir.
Glad you enjoyed it, thanks 👍🏻
Hi Kevin, great video! Would you consider doing a reaction video on historically accurate (or innaccurate) medieval tv shows or movies such as The Hollow crown, Henry V, Monty Python, etc? Would love to hear your insight or comments on the medieval era portrayed in media.
Great suggestion! I'll take a look at this for a Q&A session.
Always thought Monty Python was a REALISTIC representation of medieval knights, another illusion scattered 😉😁
Thank you for this Kevin.
Many ppl think that the bow won the battle on its own mowing down armoured knights like a hot knife going through butter.
This simply is not true.
Did the bows contribute in a significant manor?
100% yes otherwise the English would not have fielded so many battle after battle if they were not effective.
But the reality is more complicated
The bow was effective in numbers and in volleys where 1/100 arrows might penetrate and injure or kill a knight.
Well when you have 5000 archers these 1/100 shots add up.
It’s a numbers game.
To add to this when you know that 1/100 arrows might hit an area on the knight that is not encased in plate, like an armpit, knee/elbow joint etc that is protected my mail or gambeson, this is where the draw weight of the bow counts.
The higher draw weight of the bow will ensure that when these “lucky shots” occur they will penetrate to depths that are more likely to cause incapacitating or lethal damage compared to a lower draw weight bow.
After all mail and gambeson is still decent armour that needs force to be defeated.
Additionally Like Kevin stated, bowmen were professional soldiers and after they exhausted their arrows they drew their side arms and entered the melee.
They would have killed many Frenchmen in melee.
So the victory at Agincourt can be attributed to many strategies and weapon systems including the English Warbow which is a great weapon during this time.
All great points Stavros - thanks for watching & joining in the conversation 👍🏻
@@thehistorysquad thank you and keep up the great work
love channels like yours that give us an honest glimpse into history!
Wow ,when you pulled out that knife I jumped! I got caught up in the moment
Wonderful, thanks Sandy.