Agincourt

You will probably know from the title whether or not you want to read Agincourt: Henry V and the Battle that made England. I found it to be an enjoyable read that provided the historical and cultural context for the battle. Juliet Barker portrays Henry as a organizational and political genius who rebuilt and re-legitimized royal power in England. Most of the book is spent describing what Henry had to do to get an Army over to France in order to make claim to the crown of France.

Probably the most interesting thing that Barker makes clear is how little we know about the battle itself. She notes where she disagrees with other historians of the battle, including Anne Curry who published an Agincourt book around the same time as this one. Among the uncertain questions are just how the battle field was arrayed, what happened to the French archers and crossbowmen, how many Frenchmen were there (estimates range from about 15,000 to as much as 80,000,) and how many Frenchman died in the controversial denouement. Barker does a good job laying out her argument that poor French leadership led to the defeat of a force that should have beaten the English.

One area that remained murky for me was the French side. While I am reasonably well versed in British history, my French history is lacking. The contest between Armagnac and Burgundian factions was new to me, and I really wasn't clear on it by the end. The book is written for an audience well versed in both histories, so keep this in mind.