When Historical Books Show Inaccuracies

[S'mon]

The Royal Armouries museum in Leeds, England includes regular display fights by guys in full plate armour (head to toe). They convincingly scuttle the popular wisdom (which this write seems to have bought into) that it made them unwieldy - to make the point one of the guys allowed himself to be knocked over, then he sprang to his feet pretty much as quickly as I could have done it in my normal clothes. These weren't muscle bound brutes, they were ordinary blokes who'd had experience wearing the stuff.

If you are ever in the North of the UK it is well worth visiting Leeds for the Royal Armouries - time it well and you can get to see a whole lot of ancient weaponry being put through its paces.

Cheers

I thoroughly second that - the Royal Armouries in Leeds is a great day out (you _must_ give it at least 4 hours - it's huge and full of demonstrations & great stuff). The plate armour & lucern hammer 'duel' was very interesting, although it was fully choreographed - observing medieval reenactment people bashing each other 'for real' fills in some of the gaps as to what medieval fighting actually looked like. That & contemporary sources.

 

[Desdichado]

Of course, a lot of this depends on when and where in the Middle Ages we're talking about. If we're talking about Norman knights at Hastings in 1066 vs. Teutonic Knights (of the order) at the Battle of Tannenburg in 1410, we're talking two very different Middle Ages for both armor and weapons.

Even so, I've seen guys wearing replicas of the exact armor used at Agincourt doing all kinds of acrobatic moves.

 

[S'mon]

Of course, a lot of this depends on when and where in the Middle Ages we're talking about. If we're talking about Norman knights at Hastings in 1066 vs. Teutonic Knights (of the order) at the Battle of Tannenburg in 1410, we're talking two very different Middle Ages for both armor and weapons.

Even so, I've seen guys wearing replicas of the exact armor used at Agincourt doing all kinds of acrobatic moves.

Agreed - if anything the max Dex & armour check penalties for chainmail (not chain shirt) and heavier armours in 3e seem distinctly on the harsh side.

 

[jasper]

Knights were held helpless on the ground in the sucking mud at Agincourt, which formed a seal with their rigid armour (primarily the breastplate). I expect similar things could often happen on muddy battlefields - it wasn't the weight of their armour that held them down, but the suction effect of the mud.
.

I never heard this before. Could tell me how you came to know this?
Or was the mud just like some sticky clay mud here in the South. Where you go out in your boots and come back with 4 extra pds of mud stuck to your soles.

 

[Keith]

I tend to agree with S’mon’s points. Taken completely out of context, there is nothing alarmingly inaccurate about the quotes form the book. Perhaps they are worse in context.
At any rate, the book in question is a history book in the sense that it is about the past. It doesn’t represent the cutting edge, so to speak, of the field on the topic. I don’t think Barbara Holland is a historian at all, but rather an author. I’m not certain about that, however.
At any rate, sure, there are books on the past that are not terribly accurate. Assessing whether this book is particularly bad would require that it be read by someone who knows the topic and other writings in the field. I would not dismiss it out of hand based on some misgivings. Read some other books, and find out how it diverges from them. It might turn out to be so bad that it is funny to own it, or it might turn out to only have a handful of mistakes in it.

 

[Keith]

That is certainly true about Agincourt.

 

[Desdichado]

What is certainly true about Agincourt?

 

[Darklone]

Sad story, but far from infrequent. There are still many armchair historians out there that don't believe me things about swords even if I show it to them. Same for longbows.

I am a material scientist and people don't believe me when I say them that the edge of a sword is not meant for parrying, otherwise it will be blunt soon.

There are still thousands out there who tell me a katana is the best sword quality out there. I can show them measurements and comparisons of steel quality. Do they believe the facts? Not very often.

In school I had a feminist teacher who told us that twohanded greatswords were only invented because male knights wanted to have a bigger "sword" than their opponents and declined to see any advantages in their use. We spent two hours screaming at each other. I have to admit though that my marks improved enormously afterwards. She didn't believe me but valued my way of arguing...

If you can't even convince someone like her with facts, someone with intellect and character...

 

[Umbran]

Knights were held helpless on the ground in the sucking mud at Agincourt, which formed a seal with their rigid armour (primarily the breastplate

While it is a fact that armored knights at Agincourt had huge troubles moving around in the mud, this "seal with their rigid armor" is.. well, nonsense. A breastplate does not have a simple straight edge that would make a "seal" simple without mostly immersing the knight in the mud. And if he's mostly immersed in mud, the seal is the least of his problems.

Ever been in a swimming pool and tried to walk, rather than swim? It's hard, not because any seal has been made, but simply because the water has weight, and creates drag when you move a body through it.
Good mud is worse. It's thicker and heavier than water, and resists motion more. Mud will cling, drag, and weigh you down. Hermetic seals with the breastplate though, are not gong to be a frequent problem.

 

[Theron]

Wow. While this is one of my pet topics, I've got nothing to add at this point, except my thanks for the heads-up on another book I won't have to purchase.

Nice and thorough discussion.