Why English Victory at Agincourt Despite Impenetrable Armor

One of the enduring mysteries of the Battle of Agincourt is how the English managed to secure a decisive victory given the contemporary limitations of armor and weaponry. Despite the belief that contemporary plate armor could withstand arrows, several key factors combined to give the English an edge on the field.

The Battlefield

The field of battle at Agincourt was a narrow, open piece of land, with dense forests encroaching on either side. This confined space made it extraordinarily difficult for units to maneuver effectively. The French attacked in a long, unbroken line, perpetuating a dense, impenetrable formation that only worsened the situation. Eyewitness accounts describe a scenario where the French could not break through, due to the sheer mass of forces pressing forward. This resulted in soldiers being pushed in such a way that their ability to utilize their swords effectively was severely hampered. Many soldiers found it difficult to swing their blades properly, and the stark reality was that some were even suffocated by the sheer density of the ranks.

The terrain in front of the English was particularly muddy. When the French finally reached the English line, they were already fatigued, further diminishing their effectiveness. In addition to this, the English forces had strategically placed wooden spikes along their battle line, except for a few carefully chosen gaps. This prevented the cavalry from breaking through, negating one of the French army's greatest strengths. Even knights without this advantage were vulnerable, as they could not easily navigate the terrain nor break through enemy lines as they used to.

The Role of Arrows

While plate armor was designed to withstand arrows, it was not impervious. The vulnerability lay in the armor's weaker points. Armor on arms and legs was not as robust as the breastplate, leaving these areas exposed to arrow tips at medium to short ranges. This made the knights, particularly men-at-arms, more vulnerable. The men-at-arms, comprising approximately half of the French army, were well-equipped at the time, but not all had the finest quality breastplates. Several tests have shown that arrows could still cause significant damage, especially to the arms, legs, and lower torso. These weaker points could allow for the entry of wooden shards, which could potentially hit exposed areas like joints or under the armor, such as armpits.

The added danger was exacerbated by the conflict with horses. The sharp wooden stakes through which arrows could pass also inflicted wounds on the horses, reducing their effectiveness and causing chaos in the battle.

The Strained French Advantages

The French numerical advantage was negated by the muddy conditions and the defensive arrangement of the English. The French soldiers not only had to advance over a muddy terrain, which sapped their strength, but they also encountered the wooden spikes set in a few key areas of the battlefield. This forced them to send their troopers forward in waves, drastically limiting the number of troops that could engage at any given moment. Even if the French had significantly outnumbered the English, they could not exploit this advantage without suffering heavy losses.

The Ingenuity of the English Tactics

Attuned to the challenges, the English King devised a masterstroke. Archers were instructed to circle around the flanks, not only shooting at the French but also targeting their weaker, exposed areas. The English maintained a suffocating rain of arrows, adding to the chaos and confusion. When the archers exhausted their arrows, they charged into the weakened enemy line. Equipped with malets and short swords, their charge on both sides led to a significant drop in morale among the French troops, who began to retreat.

In conclusion, the Battle of Agincourt was not just a result of the resilience of archery against armor but also a testament to the strategic brilliance and tactical preparation of the English forces.