French Armour, English Longbowmen, Agincourt.. EU Rewriting History!

reply to post by ArMaP


They may have been better equiped at that point, but it remains that their main interest was in the capture and ransom of English nobels. no the defence of their territory. this is estamblished fact. Otherwise why rush in so, unless you are sure of victory.

The longbows where the nuclear weapon of the time, so to say they were better equipped is not true, their Knights had better armour, but just like today, the most tanks will not stand up to a squash head round. so who was better equipped, really?

The agenda is that we are all one people and that really we weren;t at each other throats ever days for the last 2000 years until only 1945!! really we weren't! yeah right

Besides Portugal and England were always good allies! at elast as far as the French were concerned.

We kept the Oporto in Business in 1807!!

We're English, it late, most likely beer'd up. So at this point, even the Dutch speak better English than us!!!

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by CrankyPantsUK
They have done scientific experiments with French armour that suggests they would have won.

No, it suggests that the French were better equipped for a specific type of battle, but it was the wrong type.

They are trying to rewrite history to fit the EU agenda of a superstate.

Where is the lie?

 

Originally posted by CrankyPantsUK
Crankypants by name but as a student of military history and a sociology I have to say that our history is indeed being rewrote for the uneducated masses of the EU to accept their influence

Sorry for asking and for the off-topic, but is it "is indeed being rewrote" or "is indeed being rewritten"? That got me a little confused.

History being confused? What about the fact that Portugal is just a basket case and its history is just a blip on a word document,

You want to read your own countries history then hurry!

Even though us UK Englishmen took you, we dont own you and never will!

Originally posted by JakiusFogg
They may have been better equiped at that point, but it remains that their main interest was in the capture and ransom of English nobels. no the defence of their territory. this is estamblished fact. Otherwise why rush in so, unless you are sure of victory.

One of the problems (according to the French Wikipedia article I just read) was that some French knights started the attack on their own, without following the plan prepared on the night before, they thought it would be an easy victory.

The longbows where the nuclear weapon of the time, so to say they were better equipped is not true, their Knights had better armour, but just like today, the most tanks will not stand up to a squash head round. so who was better equipped, really?

That's why I said that they were better equipped for a different type of battle, not for the type of battle they had to fight.

The agenda is that we are all one people and that really we weren;t at each other throats ever days for the last 2000 years until only 1945!! really we weren't! yeah right

But we are really just one people. If you look at the reasons for the wars that Europe (in this case) has had, you will see that there aren't many (if there is one) war between two countries started by the people.

Besides Portugal and England were always good allies! at elast as far as the French were concerned.

Portugal and England have the oldest alliance in the world, since 1373.

Originally posted by CrankyPantsUK
History being confused? What about the fact that Portugal is just a basket case and its history is just a blip on a word document,

You want to read your own countries history then hurry!

Even though us UK Englishmen took you, we dont own you and never will!

Sorry, I don't understand a word of what you wrote.

I wouldn't worry too much.

The test is flawed from the onset and they should be ashamed to call themselves scientists from that point alone.

Putting a modern man in a suit of armour, regardless of physical capabilities, would prove jack squat.

The only persons wearing heavy armour would have been knights and men-at-arms...both profesionally trained soldiers!

That means they trained in armour routinely, and their specific capacity for performance in that armour would be significantly higher than anything that could be replicated in a modern lab...unless you want to start training children in armour.

Edit to add:
If you ever want to see this in action, put a sprinter in full football gear, and have them sprint 100 metres.

The french could have been wearing kevlar and it would not have stopped arrows from the longbow. BTW 60,000 vs 3,000 is not 6:1 ( . The ratio is correct (6-7:1,,,,more like 8,000 English vs 50,000 French). The french lost at Agincourt partly due to their cultural arrogance and tactical laziness. The English chose the field of battle and negotiated the French into a relatively narrow muddy field that resulted in the french knights on horseback being bogged down in the mud and easy targets for the volleys of english arrows. To those who also trace their heritage to England I say "we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother...."

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by CrankyPantsUK
History being confused? What about the fact that Portugal is just a basket case and its history is just a blip on a word document,

You want to read your own countries history then hurry!

Even though us UK Englishmen took you, we dont own you and never will!

Sorry, I don't understand a word of what you wrote.

Im trying to be nice


But forces from your vatican controled government tried to take my country for quite a few hundred years but was destroyed at our shores

Diffute that anyway you like!

Interesting, I never knew the UK-Portugal Alliance dated back that far. I know the British helped the Portuguese fend off Napoleon. Portugal also fought alongside the Allies in Africa and (I believe, not 100% sure) in France during World War I.

The British also have a long alliance with the Dutch dating back to the 1704 capture of Gibraltar from the Spanish. IIRC the British Royal Marines still have some sort of joint battlegroup with the Royal Dutch Marines.
Oh and Spanish people, Gibraltar's population voted by a huge gigantic majority (like 95%) in favor of remaining a British Overseas Territory in 2002 so sod off. It infuriates me how they have the nerve to complain about British Gibraltar while they still occupy Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
The french could have been wearing kevlar and it would not have stopped arrows from the longbow. BTW 60,000 vs 3,000 is not 6:1 (

. The ratio is correct (6-7:1,,,,more like 8,000 English vs 50,000 French). The french lost at Agincourt partly due to their cultural arrogance and tactical laziness. The English chose the field of battle and negotiated the French into a relatively narrow muddy field that resulted in the french knights on horseback being bogged down in the mud and easy targets for the volleys of english arrows. To those who also trace their heritage to England I say "we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother...."

You tell the EUrocrats that!

reply to post by ArMaP


1, Agreed, as I said they wanted he money they could get from ransom.

2, Even if they had better armour and were equipped for a flat land battle suited to cavalry, I still maintain that their armour would not (and did not) protect them from the longbows. despite the armour they were just outclassed! simple as that!

3. Well we are but also not. the fuedal system carried on much longer than is should have. but to pretend that we (I m mean the English and French) are now all buddy buddy, would mean that the "Entente Cordiale: would be much warmer than it is.

As much as the English love to have a go at the German, there really is a special place in our hearts reserved for the French. And them with us also. just too much history there!

4. I am drinking a bottle of Port now "Vihno do Porto QR 041229 Garantia" Never been, but I would like to one day. Yeah we like you Portuguese. You gave us the Brazilian chicks! and that is a good thing to give to the world!! hehehe

reply to post by CrankyPantsUK


Dude your thinking about Spain! Portugal is cool with the English!

Originally posted by JakiusFogg
reply to post by CrankyPantsUK

 

Dude your thinking about Spain! Portugal is cool with the English!

Wellington, my family would disagree!..


Funny how history has been messed with!


CrankypantsUK

Bye x

Oops!

A long goodbye

The documents I hold has unique take of generals during the Peninsula war..

Patience is a frikin virtue!

Forgive me, but weren't the Longbowmen actually WELSH?

Rainbows
jane

Originally posted by CrankyPantsUK
But forces from your vatican controled government tried to take my country for quite a few hundred years but was destroyed at our shores

Although Portugal was under Spanish rule at the time, it was not because we wanted it (and that's why we recovered our sovereignty in 1640), so I don't think you can say that Portugal tried to take your country, during that time there wasn't a real Portugal.

Originally posted by angelchemuel
Forgive me, but weren't the Longbowmen actually WELSH?

Rainbows
jane

Nope

Just English!

The Welsh were too busy just surving at the time x
I have Welshblood too!


But am English to the core!

Originally posted by JakiusFogg


This in its heart, truely is "gods" country for there is none like it.

A topical 'two fingers' to your "gods" (sic) country.

I, personally see no belittling of the English in that article. I think CPUK is being just a tad paranoid.

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Interesting, I never knew the UK-Portugal Alliance dated back that far. I know the British helped the Portuguese fend off Napoleon. Portugal also fought alongside the Allies in Africa and (I believe, not 100% sure) in France during World War I.

The unsigned alliance is even older, from 1294, but the English had been helping the Portuguese since 1147, when they help the first king of Portugal to conquer Lisbon from the Moors. Where I live (in Almada, on the opposite side of the Tagus river from Lisbon) there are two streets named after English crusaders that helped in the Lisbon siege and that received some lands on this area for it. Their are known in Portuguese as Osberno (probably Osborne in its original version, he wrote a long journal of his voyage to the Holy Land and back) and Liberche.

In 1385, English longbowmen helped the outnumbered Portuguese forces in their wining of the Battle of Aljubarrota against Castilian, French and Italian forces.

Portugal entered World War I to help the English, because of that alliance, and it was because of it that the Lajes air base in the Azores was rented to the English during World War II, in which Portugal was neutral.

Originally posted by JakiusFogg
3. Well we are but also not. the fuedal system carried on much longer than is should have. but to pretend that we (I m mean the English and French) are now all buddy buddy, would mean that the "Entente Cordiale: would be much warmer than it is.

Most people are not "buddy buddy" with their next door neighbours, if we think about it, that rivalry between people from different countries is a result of the way those ideas were planted by the ruling classes through the centuries, in all countries, to makes us think that we are all different, while they married with each other, making the ruling really just one large family across all Europe (and after that across the rest of the world).

Originally posted by angelchemuel
Forgive me, but weren't the Longbowmen actually WELSH?

Rainbows
jane

Nope, althoguh the Longbow originally came from Wales, by the 14th century it was Law that every Englishman should practice with a Longbow every Sunday for a few hours (it still is, technically)..

As for the battle itself, the French were arrogant and started the day with a couple of heavy cavalry charges. because the english arranged their forces behind a series of large wooden stakes, with archers and men-at-arms mixed together, the line was inpenetrable to a cavalry charge.

The French were also so tightly packed, due to the position of the English line, they couldn't even lower their lances.

After taking a mild pasting from the archers on horseback, they dismounted and proceed on foot. This was their fatal mistake. Wearing their heavy armour and with the ground boggy after heavy rain and the previous cavalry charges, the flat surface of their armoured feet stuck in the mud.

That and the fact they had to proceed up a mild slope that narrowed towards the english line meant that masses of French soldiers essentially became bogged down adn litterally couldn't move.

Under the hail of longbow fire they took heavy casualties, but the bulk of the French casualties on the day were actually caused when the English Archers and men-at-arms advanced beyond their stake line and into the mass of stuck French.

Unable to move and tightly packed, the French could not fight back against the lightly armoured English who simply went about the mass of French quite calmly and slaughtered them where they stood.

English casualties were fantastically low, simply because the French could not physically fight back.