To commemorate the 600th anniversary of the battle of Agincourt, the Royal Armouries is hosting a unique exhibition at the Tower of London from 23 October until 31 January, containing stunning contemporary art, arms, armour, music and manuscripts. On this feed you will be introduced to the battle itself, learn more about the fascinating objects on display – including our bespoke Agincourt diorama of the battle – and hear directly from the expert authors of our ‘Agincourt’ publication with Yale Books.
Keeping scrolling down to discover more and visit our website for more details on the exhibition itself.
To skip to a specific post please click the links below:
In the last post, model maker David Marshall introduced himself and the Perry’s and gave an overview of the project. Here, Alan and Michael talk through how these figures were made.
When David Marshall approached us initially to ask whether we would be interested in working on the Agincourt diorama with him for the Royal Armouries, we of course considered it an honor to be involved in such an amazing project.
Fortunately, we had already developed an Agincourt range of figures with the help of Tobias Capwell (Head of Arms and Armour, Wallace Collection in London), so we were fairly confident that our figures were historically accurate enough for the job.
The way we make original Perry Miniature figures before they’re cast in metal is fairly standard. The figures we make are generally 28mm from the foot to top of head. We start with a 1mm tinned copper wire armature (or framework); bent in the right places to form the basis for the torso, head and legs in the right pose. This is placed into a cork (see stage 1 below), which is handy to hold and maneuver in your other hand (or bionic arm in Michael’s case).
An ‘Epoxy putty’ is then added to the wire, but only a thin skin in the bulkier areas of the torso and muscles of the legs. This is then left to set, which takes about an hour. Once hardened, more putty is applied to the figure starting with the feet and legs, adding the general body shape and adding detail (stage two below). Starting with the feet and travelling up is the best way, as any overhanging cloth/armour etc. will automatically hang over in layers going up the body. Once the legs have dried, the body and head are treated in the same way (stage 3). Armour is usually added to the body at this stage, the head is left to dry before the hair/hat/ helmet is added (stage 4-5). When this is all dry, holes are drilled in the shoulders for the arms (stage 6).
Wire is inserted and bent into the right pose, and a thin skim of putty is then attached to the arms and shoulders to hold them in place and left to dry (stage 7). The arms are then worked up with more putty as before, whilst also adding the finer details. After the arms have set, the weapons are added with super glue and the figure’s hands are sculpted around the weapon (stage 8). We usually make and cast the weapons in metal before the figures so we have ready supply at this point. After this, the figure is removed from the cork and glued to a base. These putty figures are then sent off to be cast in metal.
As the majority of the figures were already in our range, one of the first jobs was to get the entire Agincourt metal figure range approved by the Royal Armouries before we could start production on the diorama itself.
Unlike our Perry Miniatures range however, these model figures weren’t intended for wargaming but for a static diorama. This meant once they had been approved we had to take off all their bases and replace them with pegs, so they could blend in seamlessly with the terrain on the model. This meant quite a bit of work as we had to go through the entire range, but it was well worth the effort in the end. Once this was done, these figures all went off to be re-moulded and cast in a tin alloy centrifugally i.e. spun-cast (see examples below).
(Above, a short video showing the process of spin-casting metal miniatures in a rubber mould. Casting being done by DP Casting.)
This was the way we were going to produce all the figures for the diorama, in just the same way we make all our metal figures. However, Alan came up with the idea of making a resin block of around 40 French men at arms, all tightly packed and weathering the arrowstorm (as mentioned in accounts), which conveniently reduced both some weight and painting time required.
Along with the lightness of the resin, the middle two ranks of men at arms were just heads and shoulders, which saved a little painting – although metal spears still had to be drilled into the figures’ hands. Single metal figures were then placed along the front and rear ranks of these resin blocks on the diorama in order to blend the mass together, which worked really well.
As the project progressed we also needed to make more bespoke figures specifically for the diorama i.e. falling horsemen, key nobles at the battle, artillery pieces on carts, arrow carts with attendees, running bowmen making way for the nobles to fight, etc. Most of these were metal, although we did use a few plastic parts as our new English Army box had just been released. Making these ‘one off’ figures for the model was great fun and what we think big dioramas are all about. In the end it’s all about the detail, something that the public – especially kids with their keen eyes – will pick up on.
After the exhibition closes at the Tower on the 31 January, the model will be making its way to Leeds later in the year where it will remain in our permanent War Gallery. The museum will be marking the occasion when it arrives with a special Hundred Years War Wargaming event. For details please get in touch with Kirsty Rogers via firstname.lastname@example.org.
As part of our 600th commemoration of the battle of Agincourt, the Royal Armouries is exhibiting a unique temporary collection of arms, armour, art, music and manuscripts at the Tower of London. To accompany the exhibition, the Royal Armouries has produced a catalogue with Yale University Press, edited by our Curator of Tower History and Tower Special Collections Malcolm Mercer and trustee Professor Anne Curry. Here, one of the contributors of the publication, Ros King, University of Southampton, writes on Shakespeare’s Henry V.
Shakespeare’s play of Henry V covers the whole of Henry’s 1415 campaign in France from initial discussions as to the validity of going to war to his eventual conquest of the French Princess Catherine in marriage. En route it presents the uncovering of the plot against him by the Earl of Cambridge and others, the death of Falstaff, Henry’s former friend and drinking companion; the embarkation of the army on an enormous flotilla of ships, the siege of Harfleur, and his notable victory at Agincourt—all, as the play’s Chorus famously remarks, by exploiting the imagination of its audience. But it is also one of Shakespeare’s most contentious works, dividing readers between those that think the play glorifies Henry’s role as one of England’s most successful military leaders, and those who think it condones war-mongering brutality. Ever since it was written, it has been cut and rearranged in attempts to iron out its contradictions and make it more simply heroic, more ‘band of brothers’. Meanwhile its most famous phrase ‘Once more into the breach’ has taken on a life of its own, being pressed into myriad uses great and small by those seeking to persuade others to do something they would probably rather not do.
My chapter in the Royal Armouries ‘Agincourt’ exhibition catalogue argues that the evident contradictions in the play are a deliberate part of its design and the reason why it is still so compelling 400 years on. The play presents a variety of crunch points on the road to war: Henry seeking the church’s support so that he does not have to bear the moral responsibility for war; church leaders persuading him to make war in order to distract him from the bill before parliament that would confiscate church lands; French ambassadors delivering a load of tennis balls, thus goading him into waging a war they believe he will lose. Most tellingly we see a poor ordinary soldier, Michael Williams, one of the very few commoners in the history plays to whom Shakespeare ever gives a name, as he struggles to make sense of what has brought him, cold and hungry, to a field in France. How does he know that this war is just? What will happen to the many wives and children who will be left destitute back home? And how is it that an unknown stranger (Henry in disguise) somehow manages to deflect his anxieties with platitudes about an individual’s responsibility for his own soul? He knows that the stranger has not answered his question about whether the war is just, but cannot put his finger on quite how he has sidestepped the issue. His frustration breaks out into violence.
Title page of Q1 The Chronicle History of Henry Fift (1600)
In fact the play is as full of instances of treachery, deceit, exploitation and violence between the multinational, English, Scots, Welsh and Irish troops in Henry’s so-called ‘English’ army as it is of battle between English and French. Its contradictions ask us to consider both the idea of ‘right’ on the road to war, and the nature of justice in the conduct of that war: these are the same questions that currently fill the news channels with regard to the conduct of wars in Iraq and Syria.
Henry horrifies us with his attempt to force the surrender of Harfleur by threatening to rape and murder its women, children, and old people. In Shakespeare’s day this speech might have recalled the behaviour of (Catholic) Spanish troops sacking (Protestant) towns in the Netherlands. Today it evokes the actions of so-called Islamic State. But the licence to sack a town that has held out under siege, and to kill or enslave its inhabitants is justified in the bible (Deuteronomy 20.10-20). Objecting to that behaviour means being able to reject part of a revered religious text. In the end, the play’s Henry orders that the inhabitants be well treated; the historical Henry expelled them so that the town could be settled by poor Englishmen.
Shakespeare’s play also presents, one after the other, two different historical versions of Henry’s other potential violation of the law of war: his order to kill the French prisoners. In one version, this act is pragmatic, although still brutal: the French are regrouping and the English cannot afford to keep prisoners alive. In the other, it is retribution for a French war-crime—the massacre of unarmed boys. The Welsh and English captains, Fluellen and Gower, are completely satisfied by this second explanation. Audiences, though, have just been made to witness the so-called ‘fog of war’ in operation.
It is well known that Shakespeare borrowed extensively from other writers—for this play, his main source was Holinshed’s Chronicle history of England. But he was not someone who would make do with the obvious sources if something else could be brought in to complicate the plot. My colleague Craig Lambert has recently demonstrated that the fleet that transported Henry’s army to France was only half the size previously thought: a mere 700 ships rather than the 1500 claimed in the St Albans Chronicle or even the 1000 in Holinshed. In reality, he says, rather than the ‘city on th’inconstant billows dancing’ that Shakespeare describes, it was more of a ‘town’.
But truth in plays, even history plays, is sometimes wider than a single set of historical facts. I demonstrate that Shakespeare was exploiting a very different maritime event in order to make his dramatic point: Cleopatra in her barge on the River Cydnus when she first beguiled Mark Antony. Shakespeare knew of this extravaganza from the description by the Romano-Greek historian Plutarch in a recently published English translation by Sir Thomas North. He would later incorporate it word for word in the play Antony and Cleopatra. As used in Henry V, a few strangely antique words betray their origin, and give the description of Henry’s fleet an exotic, mythical character. If it seems odd to liken Henry’s military expedition to the most famous seduction event in history, the idea finds ironic culmination at the end of the play when he presses his suit to Catherine: ‘in loving me you should love the friend of France; for I love France so well that I will not part with a village of it; I will have it all mine’; all his, even though it now lies in ruins from the effects of his war.
The Meeting of Antony and Cleopatra, by Lawrence Alma-Tadema, 1884, Sotheby’s New York.
Thus, although the confident assertions of the play’s Chorus have contributed to the lasting myth that is Agincourt, the play’s structure, taken in its entirety, with its wide-ranging comparisons, contradictions, ironies, and black humour raises questions to which we still seek answers: about appropriate punishment; the nature of loyalty, and of treachery; the responsibility of friendship; and the right to make war. If we really were to engage our imaginations, this structure might help us expand our ethical understanding of these topics. Rather than asking us to make an either/or interpretation, the play invites us to respond with ‘yes, and . . .’.
To discover more from our ‘Agincourt’ publication, please see further posts via this link, or pick up a copy for yourself via the Yale University Press website. The Royal Armouries Agincourt exhibition is open at the Tower of London from 23 October until 31 January. For more details please visit our website.
As part of the museum’s commemoration of the 600th anniversary of the battle of Agincourt, the Royal Armouries is exhibiting a unique collection at the Tower of London from 23 October until 31 January. For this special exhibition, the museum commissioned a bespoke diorama of the battle with David Marshall, model maker of MMDioramas, along with Alan and Michael Perry of Perry Miniatures.
Here, the model maker and project manager David Marshall introduces himself, the Perry brothers, and how this model took shape over the last two years.
Meet the model makers: David Marshall, MMDioramas
David Marshall (me) and the Agincourt diorama
I’ve been a wargamer from the moment I bought my first packs of Airfix soldiers from the local toy shop over 40 years ago. I still remember what they were, WW1 German infantry and American Civil War artillery! Since then I have bought, painted, played and built anything to do with the wargaming and toy soldier hobby. As a regular show demonstrator, my work was getting increasingly positive responses from people, so one Monday morning in April 2002 – after I had had a particularly successful weekend show – I walked into my boss’s office and handed in my notice.
TmTerrain was born, a business I started initially with my friend Mark, supplying one off quality terrain to the hobby market. As a full time model maker for over a decade I’ve built all sorts of projects for customers all over the world, and I haven’t had a day off due to lack of work in all that time – something that continually amazes me.
When the Agincourt project with the Royal Armouries came along, I decided that I wanted to develop this side to my work through MMDioramas, so I could work on future large military based projects for museums and other similar organisations. Time will tell if it is a success, but one thing I can say though is that any future work will have to go some way to get more high profile!
The Perry brothers, Alan and Michael, have been making figures professionally for 37 years, as they began freelancing when still at school! They started sculpting professionally at Games Workshop in 1978, making historical wargames figures for Wargames Foundry in their spare time from 1985 (alongside their Games Workshop 9-5 day job). After leaving Wargames Foundry in 2001 they started up their own company Perry Miniatures, making historical figures in over 30 ranges covering periods which range from the first Crusades to World War Two. They aim to make more ranges in both metal and plastic, and they both sculpt figures in the traditional way – by hand rather than digitally.
Recently they were heavily involved in a massive Gallipoli diorama for Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson, which is now on show at the Pukeahu National War Memorial museum, Wellington.
The Perrys are both keen wargamers themselves and enjoy using their own ranges to game with. Being re-enactors since 1980 (until 2014) they have a full grasp of how various weapons are used/held and armour is worn etc. which is invaluable when designing figures. Michael’s right hand was blown off in an accident when loading cannon in 1996 at a re-enactment of the Battle of Crécy, but learnt to use his left hand in a couple of weeks. The brothers have also illustrated many military books and are keen collectors of militaria.
Introducing the model: the facts and stats
The Agincourt diorama is 4 meters by 2 meters in size, and made up from four 2m x 1m sections. 4,400 28mm figures make up its face, supplied by Perry Miniatures. 4,000 of the figures were painted by only two gentlemen from Nottingham, Painted Minis. The other 400 on the field were painted by Andy Taylor, Dave Andrews, Steve Hall, Simon Chick, The Perrys, the Royal Armouries Thom Richardson and me.
The 100 trees and coppicing were made for the model by Keith from Realistic Modelling Supplies, and the 40 banners were supplied by GMB designs. The model itself took two years to make.
Overview of the project.
In January 2014, the letter arrived informing myself and the Perrys that we had won the contract to work with the Royal Armouries on this project. I had to put my project manager hat straight on as I realised my model making skills won’t be seen for a few months! Now was the time for planning.
The first priority was to get the figures started. We had not got a final number confirmed yet, but there would be 1000’s required to finish the model, so the sooner we got going the more time we would give the painters to get them done. Every figure from the Perrys Agincourt range was approved by Royal Armouries, which was really important to everyone involved as it reflected our commitment to a true authentic representation of the battle. As the Perrys had worked closely with the Wallace Collection’s Tobias Capwell when creating their original Agincourt range of figures, we were confident there shouldn’t be any major issues, but it was still a relief when the approval came through.
At the end of June (2014) we got to see the figures, and received an approved colour pallet (see below) which went straight to Painted Minis for reference. They had committed to painting 500 figures a month so getting this to them on time was vital. Phew!
August saw the first 500 figures back from Painted Minis. This gave me something to play with and it felt like real progress was being made. The battle was starting to take shape. Around the same time a big box full of trees arrived for us to play with. I love making terrain so I was really looking forward to this part.
We discussed whether the landscape should be 3D printed with the Royal Armouries, however this was soon discounted due to cost and so I could apply a more traditional approach, which meant I could get my modelling hat on at last.
The model base being constructed
In January 2015, the landscape was mostly shaped and nearly 3,000 figures painted, so we could start playing soldiers – which involved moving blocks of figures around to decide on the final layout. The overall layout and content had been decided months before, when the figure scale of each 1 figure equaling 5 men was agreed on (see initial sketch at the top). We still had to pin the detail down however; including the personalities, banners, stakes, and we had to check that the whole exciting story of the battle was being told and interpreted properly.
Allan Perry with Thom Richardson of the Royal Armouries and the Queen of Agincourt herself Anne Curry, who is also Trustee of the Royal Armouries.
I think this was the most frustrating, exciting, worrying and ultimately rewarding part of the whole project. It was worth every minute of discussion and it just left us to push on now to completion. Details still needed to be decided on such as field patterns, woodland use, and the style of coppicing in the woods either side. It took two or three goes at it to get the coppicing right, but the attention to detail really paid off.
Furnishing the model involved placing 4,500 figures, 100 trees, 100s of wooden stakes, and over 1,000 arrows stuck into the ground. A mammoth job but with amazing results!
The first figures are fixed to the board. No going back now!
Alan and Michael Perry having an ice cream break from placing figures
June (2015) saw the diorama 95% complete, so it was time for the final meeting with the Royal Armouries before the model went off to have its special case fitted for the exhibition. I expected this to be one of the most nervous days of my life as I collected everyone in a conference room before the big reveal. When the moment came however, I was totally calm. I was confident that we had delivered a spectacular diorama of the battle and just couldn’t wait to share it with them!
The project took about 2 years to complete. During that time many people have seen the diorama as they worked on it, and a few other war gamers and history fans have had the chance of a sneak a peek.
The Perry brothers, Royal Armouries team, and myself placing Henry V on the battlefield.
Just before the model was due to be delivered, I had a visit from my son Ben and his girlfriend Rachel. She has been put through visits to tank museums, and other military and architectural delights since joining our family. I was very pleased to see her and they spent a while having a good look at the diorama. They then went off to lunch with her family where the discussion started about the battle, as her Dad has read a lot about it so could explain what happened during the engagement.
Rachel suddenly realised she understood and could visualise what happened on that day in 1415. The diorama allowed her to connect and understand the battle. I have had lots of people tell me how good the diorama looks and what a great job we’ve done, but it was Rachel’s experience that was the most satisfying for me. It demonstrates how powerfully a diorama can connect with the viewer and make historical moments such as the battle of Agincourt accessible to a wider audience. The perfect result!
The 22nd September saw the team working in the shadow of the Tower of London in the pouring rain, looking at a crane to winch the whole exhibition up into the top floor.
We waited for our turn, which was easily the most nervous part of the whole project, and thankfully when it was the rain stopped and each piece went up beautifully. I suddenly realised I was running high on adrenaline and coffee up to then, so once I saw all of the sections up there I was very relieved!
The next two days saw us install the diorama in the exhibition space and complete the final hand over, with the project sign off occurring at 2pm on the 23rd September. The Royal Armouries team gave us the all clear.
After two years of work completed successfully, we packed up our tools and drove home! To celebrate when I got home, I watched the Great British Bake Off and then went to bed! Mission accomplished.
After the exhibition closes at the Tower on the 31 January the model will be making its way to Leeds later in the year, where it will remain in our permanent War Gallery. The museum will be marking the occasion when it arrives with a special Hundred Years War Wargaming event. For details please get in touch with Kirsty Rogers via email@example.com.
In the reign of Henry V England had a gold coinage of the noble (worth one third of a pound), with the half and quarter noble, and silver coins from the groat (four pence) to the farthing (a quarter of a penny). A loaf could be bought for a farthing, and a skilled craftsman would earn only a few pence a day. The gold coins were mostly used by merchants, gentry and aristocracy.
Gold Noble. Henry V. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.
Henry V was very concerned about the widespread ‘clipping’ of the gold coinage, which involved the removal of gold from the edges of the coins, to be melted down and sold or converted into counterfeit coins. This became treason in a statute of 1416, and by the end of Henry V’s reign in 1422 at least thirty people had been executed for this offence. In 1421, when a tax was voted by parliament to support Henry V’s French war, the government had to allow Henry’s subjects to pay in clipped gold coins, because so many coins had been clipped. After this, clipped gold coins were recalled to the mints and replaced by new unclipped coins.
Henry V clipped quarter noble obverse. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.
Henry V clipped quarter noble reverse. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.
Henry V’s government also had to deal with the use of foreign coins in England, which was made illegal in 1415. Venetian silver coins known as ‘galley halfpence’ (because they were brought to England by the fleet of Venetian galleys that visited England once a year to trade) were seen as a particular problem. In 1416 the Venetian Senate bowed to English diplomatic pressure by officially banning this activity. Henry V’s campaigns in France soon brought a fresh challenge from imports of debased blancs issued by the English authorities in Normandy and the French and Burgundian governments. These were made illegal in 1424, after Henry’s death.
As part of our 600th commemoration of the battle of Agincourt, the Royal Armouries is exhibiting a unique temporary collection of arms, armour, art, music and manuscripts at the Tower of London.To accompany the exhibition, the Royal Armouries has produced a catalogue with Yale University Press, edited by our Curator of Tower History and Tower Special Collections Malcolm Mercer and trustee Professor Anne Curry. Here, one of the contributors of the publication, Thom Richardson of the Royal Armouries, writes about the iconic longbows of the battle.
The accounts of the privy wardrobe, the fourteenth century organisation which ran the armoury at the Tower of London and the earliest ancestor of the present-day Royal Armouries, give incredible detail about the manufacture, storage and issue of armour and weapons, especially longbows and arrows, throughout the first half of the Hundred Years War. Unfortunately the records run out after 1410, so the details about what went over to Harfleur with Henry V for the Agincourt campaign don’t survive. But we have a pretty good idea of all the processes from what went on before.
On the whole, each archer in an English army was issued for each campaign with a bow, between two and five bowstrings and two ‘sheaves’ of arrows (each of twenty-four arrows tied up with hemp cord, which they reused to tie the arrows round their waists for battle, no quivers).
An example of an ‘arrow bag’ as used at the battle in 1415.
Ordinary arrows were of poplar, fletched with goose feathers and fitted with a single type of low-barbed head. The best bows were painted, and supplied with ash arrows with steel heads, fletched with peacock feathers.
Though hardly any medieval longbows survive either, we now have an amazing group of them from the Mary Rose, which have revolutionised our understanding of the weapon in the last twenty years. We now think they ranged in draw weight between 65–160 lb, with an average about 110 lb, double what we thought a generation ago.
Bow, from the wreck of the Mary Rose sunk in 1545, English, mid-16th century.
Odd that this change in understanding should have taken so long, as we have had two of the Mary Rose bows, excavated from the bottom of the Solent by John Deane and William Edwards using their newly invented diving apparatus in 1840, on display at the Tower ever since.
Anyway, the ‘new’ high-powered bows have been reconstructed, experimented with, and enabled the rediscovery of a medieval style of shooting ‘in the bow’ which had been lost through centuries of target archery with much lighter longbows. One of these experimental archaeologists, Mark Stretton, who is one of the best exponents of this rediscovered style of shooting, undertook a fascinating experiment with a bow, some arrows and a radio-controlled lawnmower, which showed that a skilled medieval archer could shoot just three aimed arrows into a charging French knight (or lawnmower). See below a clip of Mark shooting a 140lb self yew bow made by Pip Bickerstaffe.
Filmed at the shooting at Malestroit Medieval Festival 2011, by bowyer (longbow-maker) Ian Cootes (40bowyr).
While the bows have ‘become’ more powerful than we used to think, the ‘arrowstorm’ beloved of English archery enthusiasts has diminished. We used to talk about resupply of arrows as if it was a natural and simple process, but the privy wardrobe accounts show otherwise. Each archer had two sheaves of arrows to last a campaign, and would probably go into battle with just one of them. So all the statistics of how many arrows an archer can shoot in a minute are very much put into perspective by realising that such an arrowstorm could last just three minutes, then the arrows were gone. Once we are aware of that, we can see it happening in the sources: at Poitiers in 1356 the English archers ran out, and tried to recover spent arrows. At Towton in 1461 the Lancastrian archers ran out of arrows, and suffered the indignity of having the Yorkists shoot their own arrows back at them. So the vision moves away from darkening the sky with arrows like the Persians’ at Thermopylae towards a smaller number of accurately aimed arrows shot from very powerful bows by highly skilled and practised professional archers.
The Battle of Agincourt catalogue and exhibition present a whole new way of looking at English medieval archery, derived from the study of actual objects, experimental archaeology and medieval documents, all working together to provide a new understanding of the past. And we have acquired a large group of English arrowheads of the period, mostly from the River Thames, to go in the exhibition. Sadly Westminster Abbey, who own the only fifteenth century arrow in England, couldn’t lend it to us, but our bows and arrowheads will join forces with the Mary Rose bows and arrows (no heads, iron hardly survives at all on the Mary Rose) to present in the catalogue and exhibition the most comprehensive display about English medieval archery ever staged.
Broadhead (arrowhead) European, 15th c. Royal Armouries collection.
To discover more from our ‘Agincourt’ publication, please see further posts via this link, or pick up a copy for yourself via the Yale University Press website. The Royal Armouries Agincourt exhibition is open at the Tower of London from 23 October until 31 January. For more details please visit our website.