Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:40:04.734Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes on the Agincourt Roll

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

J. Hamilton Wylie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

If anyone were to ask where he ought to look for the Roll of Agincourt he would probably be told that he would find it in the ‘History of the Battle,’ published by Sir Harris Nicolas in 1827, in which there are seventy-two pages of printed matter containing ‘the names of the Dukes, Earls, Barons, Knights, Esquires, Servitours and others that wer withe the Excellent Prince King Henry the Fifte at the Battell of Agincourt’; and if he wanted to know (as which of us would not?) whether one of his ancestors took part in the fight he would look through that list and if he found the name he would probably say, ‘It's all right, he was there!’ but if he didn't he might say, ‘Rubbish! You mustn't expect me to be convinced by such a mass of confusion as that!’ Such a man's difficulty is the one that I want this learned society to look into this afternoon, and in venturing to set before you the dry bones of the skeleton of what is really a very complicated question I need not say that I am here to-day with the very greatest diffidence, for I expect that there are many experts present who will say of the contents of my paper that ‘that which is true is not new and—’ you know the other half of the epigram. I speak, therefore, under a natural feeling of stage fright such as seized upon Henry Buckle when he first faced a Royal Institution audience and felt inclined at the beginning to run away there and then, though I cannot venture to hope for the success he achieved before he sat down at the end. At the risk, however, of wandering among platitudes, I will, if you please, assume conventionally that some at least in this audience may be as ignorant of the main features of my problem as I was myself when I attempted to look into it several years ago. I was then seeking for such first-hand evidence as might still exist for the details of the campaign that ended with the great battle of St. Crispin's Day and whether there was any hope of getting on to firm ground in dealing with the conflicting statements as to the numbers and composition of the force with which Henry V set sail from Southampton in August 1415 and ten weeks later fought the wonderful fight that had such far-reaching effects on the course of the history, not only of our own country and of France, but on that of the whole of Western Europe.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 5 , December 1911 , pp. 105 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1911

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 107 note 1 Beamont, , Warrington Church Notes, i. 232Google Scholar, where Harington's name is written over an erasure.

page 109 note 1 E.g. Robert Umfraville (20 + 40) though the original indenture is dated Nov. 17, 1413, and does not therefore refer to this campaign; John Norreys, captain of Conway (not Cournay), which refers to Sept. 24, 1413, and Gilbert Umfraville (20 + 90) should be 30 + 90.

page 109 note 2 Hunter, , p. 2.Google Scholar

page 110 note 1 E.g. Belleval, , 354–365, including Nicolas' mistakes.Google Scholar

page 110 note 2 Also in Exch. Accts. 44/30 (4).

page 110 note 3 With 5 archers though only 3 in 45/24, 46/18, 19 where their names are given.

page 111 note 1 For retinue of Wm. Grantson, Grunston, Grauntson, or Granson, kt. (2 + 6) see Exch. Accts. 44/30, 45/5 (6), 47/18. L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts. 6/8, where his claim is included in that of Robert Lovell, Esq.

page 112 note 1 For their names see Exch. Accts. 47/39. The names include 4 barons (Dominus de Hastings, Grey de Wilton—called John Gray in Hardyng, 390, Bourchier and Clynton), 22 knights (including Carroe, i.e. Thomas Carew, Richard Arundel, J. Blount, J. Greindour, J. Skidmore, J. Fastolf and J. Baskerville) + 273 squires and 900 archers, though at the foot they seem to be summarised as 798 only. See Hunter, , p. 55.Google Scholar The list would be worth printing as a study in proper names.

page 112 note 2 Or Deverose (d. 1419). For his possessions in Gloucestershire and Dorset see Inq. p. Mort., iv. 42.Google Scholar

page 112 note 3 He owned land at Brackenhohne near Howden in the Riding, E., Cal, Pat. Hy. VI, i. 465.Google Scholar

page 113 note 1 For his monument and that of his wife, Mathilda, at Elford, see Clinch, , Costume, 58, 60Google Scholar, showing an orle on the basnet.

page 113 note 2 Cal. Pat. Hy. IV, iv. 35, 182, 475.Google Scholar

page 113 note 3 Cal. Pat. Hy. V., i. 178.Google Scholar

page 113 note 4 Cal. Pat. Hy. VI, ii. 254.Google Scholar

page 113 note 5 Cal. Pat. Hy. VI, i, 64, 136, 176, 181, 188, 313, 370; ii. 205.Google Scholar

page 114 note 1 For his indenture of service (20 + 60) see Hunter, , 49.Google Scholar

page 114 note 2 Foreign Accts., P.R.O., Preface, p, iii.Google Scholar

page 115 note 1 Sussex Archœological Collections, xv, 126, who calls it a Pipe Roll.Google Scholar

page 116 note 1 The Latin title is: Rotulus demonstrationum diversorum ducum, comitum, baronum, militum, scutiferorum et aliorum hominum cum nominibus retinentiarum suarum que fuerunt cum domino rege apud bellum de Agencourt die veneris 25 die Octob. anno 1415 et regni regis predicti tertio ad scaccarium domini Regis in Anglia coram Thesaurario et Baronibus nono decimo die Novembris anno quarto regis predicti permanus Roberti Babthorp liberat' ubi singulorum ducum, comitum, baronura militum scutiferorum et aliorum hominum singillatim adnotantur.’

page 116 note 2 ‘Ubi singulorum hominum ad arma et sagittariorum nomina cum nominibus retinentiarum suarum singillatim annotantur qui remanent in custodia rememoratoris regis ibidem custodiendum.’ For a slightly different version see Hunter, , p. 11.Google Scholar

page 117 note 1 Exch. Accts. 51/2, called ‘one of the most interesting records of military history now extant,’ Norman Rolls, p. ixGoogle Scholar; Tyler, , ii. 212.Google Scholar

page 117 note 2 Nicolas, , cccxcix.Google Scholar

page 117 note 3 For a transcript of it by F. Devon see Add. MS. 24704, who endorsed it as a ‘Copy of Muster Roll called the Agincourt Roll.’ I am informed that another transcript is now in the possession of Mr, W, F. Irvine, of Birkenhead, who purchased it at the sale of Mr. Joseph Foster's collection.

page 118 note 1 His tract, which he entitled Agincourt—A Contribution towards an Authentic List of the Commanders of the English Host, so far as I can discover has received but scant attention, though it is really of the very first importance. My only quarrel with him is his tantalising habit of not giving a single definite reference to enable the reader to verify the documents from one end of his treatise to the other. This was doubtless due to the fact that he perused them just as he discovered them before the days of catalogues and calendars. I think, however, that I have been able to identify every document that he used. They will all be found in the Exchequer Accounts under the sub-heading Army in the catalogue of the Public Record Office.

page 118 note 2 Hunter, , 11.Google Scholar

page 118 note 3 Quarterly Review, xxxix, 65.Google Scholar

page 119 note 1 Hunter, , p. 4.Google Scholar

page 120 note 1 Add. MS. 30323, ff. 15, 16Google Scholar, which is an extract from the Ashmolean MS. made by Wm, Mytton, a Shropshire antiquary in the eighteenth century.

page 120 note 2 Notandum quod in hoc libro lanceorum nomina singulatim eo ordine quo in originali ponebantur, hie quoque ponuntur—cum tarnen sagittariorum nomina omittuntur at verus eorum numerus hic quoque scribitur.

page 120 note 3 Nicolas, , pp. 102–104.Google Scholar

page 122 note 1 Nicolas, , cccxcviii.Google Scholar

page 122 note 2 Ramsay, , i. 200Google Scholar, who notes that the lists ‘abound in errors and double entries.’

page 123 note 1 E.g. Ralph Pope and John Elman (not Elmain) and Ivel (not Ebull) Strange, the names of whose retinues appear in Exch. Accts. 45/18, 47/4.

page 123 note 2 Vincent, , Discoverie of Errors (1619), Introduction.Google Scholar

page 126 note 1 For retinue of Mons. William de Botreaux (20 + 40) see Nicolas, 374, but 23 + 60 on Muster-Roll (Exch, Accts, 45/18).

page 127 note 1 ? Same as Thomas Capper in (c).

page 127 note 2 Evere or Eure.

page 127 note 3 See Thomas Stapper in (b). In Pat. 3 H. V, ii. 35 (Oct. 9, 1415) Thomas Bernes is going abroad in comitiva of the Duke of Gloucester, but his name does not appear in any of the lists. In his claim (L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts. 6/4) the Duke of Gloucester deducts 72 + 211 from his indentured numbers, apparently as being absent from the battle, thereby reducing his numbers actually present at Agincourt to 128 + 389 while Brook's list gives 142 + 406. The composition of the retinue has been recently discussed by Mr. Kenneth Vickers (p. 18 from Hunter, , p. 21Google Scholar) giving a somewhat complicated calculation as to the numbers based on the wages paid during the first quarter which are assumed to amount to about £3000.

page 128 note 1 Called ‘Caumyzt’ in Heralds' College MS. For his safe conduct, dated June 5, 1415, see Carte, , Rolles, ii, 221Google Scholar; called June 12 in Cooper, W. D., 133.Google Scholar

page 129 note 1 Though in Exch. Accts., 45/18, he appears in the retinue of William Lord Botreaux and was left in garrison at Harfleur.

page 129 note 2 See page 134.

page 129 note 3 Unless this is John Bryggez in J. Burgh's retinue.

page 129 note 4 This name occurs in the Duke of Gloucester's retinue.

page 129 note 5 Or Tregonenn.

page 130 note 1 Including John Sterling, who is known to have been in Erpingham's muster independently, i.e. from Cal. Doc. Scot. iv. 173Google Scholar, dated Southampton, July 23, 1415. Two men of arms, viz. Thomas Geney and John Calthorpe, in this retinue were killed in the battle (Hunter, , 35Google Scholar), but do not appear in Brook's list as present there.

page 131 note 1 For his will dated June 18, 1417, see Dugd, . ii. 99Google Scholar (not January 18th as Test. Vet. 197Google Scholar) when he was proposing to go abroad. It was proved, April 26, 1418, Ing. p. Mort. iv. 35.Google Scholar He died Feb. 11, 1418, Langten, , i. 126, 134Google Scholar from Inquisitions held at Lancaster on March 20, June 23, 1418.

page 133 note 1 See p. 110. In Iss. Roll 3 H. V. Mich., 12 23, 1415Google Scholar, March 2, 1416, John Burgh has 5d. paid as Cleric. Thes. from July 18, 1415. For £40 p.a. granted to him by Henry IV, see ibid. Dec. 20, also 5d. paid to him as a scribe, ibid. December 23, 1415. In Brook's list occurs the name of Gregory Ballard who brought 3 archers. In Exch. Accts., 47/10, he is dead and his widow, Catherine, has become the wife of J. Burgh. See also L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts., 6/3, where payment is only claimed till Oct 6, 1415.

page 134 note 1 In L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts., 6/9 he is defunctus in 1426, his executors being Richard (his son and heir), Nicolas Haryngton and Richard de Shirbourne. By his indenture dated May 12, 1415, he was to bring 50 Lancashire archers who are entered in the account of Richard Ursewyk, kt., where wages are claimed for them from July 8 to Oct. 6. He also indentured for 10 + 30, of which number he himself and one of the men-of-arms were sent back from Harfleur to defend the northern part of England. Two archers died at Harfleur, 1 archer was left in garrison at Harfleur and the rest (8 + 26) were in the battle and all returned to Dover, with 39 horses, in Nov. 1415. He was Sheriff of Cumberland in 1413 (List of Sheriffs, 27), was knighted Nov. 6, 1413 (Shaw, , ii. 11Google Scholar). For his indenture of service see p. 107.

page 134 note 2 Of whom 1 man-of-arms died at Harfleur, L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts., 6/11.

page 134 note 3 He was invalided home from Harfleur, but his 2 archers were in the battle.

page 134 note 4 But 3 + 12 in Exch. Accts., 46/12.

page 134 note 5 For his indenture (2 + 6) see Exch. Accts., 46/8, but names of 2 + 8 in 46/9 though totalled as 2 + 6 in side note on same roll.

page 137 note 1 From Exch. Accts., 45/15; 45/22 (39).

page 137 note 2 Sic in Exch. Accts., 45/5.

page 138 note 1 Exch. Accts., 45/5.

page 138 note 2 Exch. Accts., 45/5.

page 138 note 3 L. T. R. Misc. Enrolled Accts., 6/8.