« ZurückWeiter »
When the French observed the English thus advance, they drew up each under his banner, with his helmet on his head: they were, at the same time, admonished by the constable, and others of the princes, to confess their sins with sincere contrition and to fight boldly against the enemy. The English loudly sounded their trumpets as they approached, and the French stooped to prevent the arrows hitting them on the vizors of their helmets; thus the distance was now but small between the two armies, although the French had retired some paces. Before, however, the general attack commenced, numbers of the French were slain and severely wounded by the English bowmen. At length the English gained on them so much, and were so close, that excepting the front line, and such as had shortened their lances, the enemy could not raise their hands against them. The division under sir Clugnet de Brabant, of eight hundred men-at-arms, who were intended to break through the English archers, were reduced to seven score, who vainly attempted it. True it is, that sir William de Saveuses, who had been also ordered on this service, quitted his troop, thinking they would follow him, to attack the English, but he was shot dead from off his horse. The others had their horses so severely handled by the archers, that, smarting from pain, they galloped on the van division and threw it into the utmost confusion, breaking the line in many places. The horses were become unmanageable, so that horses and riders were tumbling on the ground, and the whole army was thrown into disorder, and forced back on some lands that had been just sown with corn. Others, from fear of death, fled; and this caused so universal a panic in the army that great part followed the example. The English took instant advantage of the disorder in the van division, and, throwing down their bows, fought lustily with swords, hatchets, mallets, and bill-hooks, slaying all before them. Thus they came to the second battalion that had been posted in the rear of the first; and the archers followed close king Henry and his men-at-arms. Duke Anthony of Brabant, who had just arrived in obedience to the summons of the king of France, threw himself with a small company (for, to make greater haste, he had pushed forward, leaving the main body of his men behind), between the wreck of the van and the second division; but he was instantly killed by the English, who kept advancing and slaying, without mercy, all that opposed them, and thus destroyed the main battalion as they had done the first. They were, from time to time, relieved by their varlets, who carried off the prisoners; for the English were so intent on victory, that they never attended to making prisoners, nor pursuing such as fled. The whole rear division being on horseback, witnessing the defeat of the two others, began to fly, excepting some of its principal chiefs. During the heat of the combat, when the English had gained the upper hand and made several prisoners, news was brought to king Henry that the French were attacking his rear, and had already captured the greater part of his baggage and sumpter-horses. This was indeed true, for Robinet de Bournouville, Riflart de Clamasse, Ysambart d'Azincourt, and some other men-at-arms, with about six hundred peasants, had fallen upon and taken great part of the king's baggage and a number of horses, while the guard was occupied in the battle. This distressed the king very much, for he saw that though the French army had been routed they were collecting on different parts of the plain in large bodies, and he was afraid they would renew the battle. He therefore caused instant proclamation to be made by sound of trumpet, that every one should put his prisoners to death, to prevent them from aiding the enemy, should the combat be renewed. This caused an instantaneous and general massacre of the French prisoners, occasioned by the disgraceful conduct of Robinet de Bournouville, Ysambart d'Azincourt, and the others, who were afterward punished for it, and imprisoned a very long time by duke John of Burgundy, notwithstanding they had made a present to the count de Charolois of a most precious sword, ornamented with diamonds, that had belonged to the king of England. They had taken this sword, with other rich jewels, from king Henry's baggage",—and had made this present, that, in case they should at any time be called to an account for what they had done, the count might stand their friend. The count de Marle, the count de Fauquemberg, the lords de Louvroy and du Chin, had with some difficulty retained about six hundred men-at-arms, with whom they made a gallant charge on the English; but it availed nothing, for they were all killed or made * See the Foedera, where the loss of these jewels, &c. is specified.
prisoners. There were other small bodies of French on different parts of the plain; but they were soon routed, slain, or taken. The conclusion was a complete victory on the part of the king of England, who only lost about sixteen hundred men of all ranks"; among the slain was the duke of York+, uncle to the king. On the eve of this battle, and the following morning, before it began, there were upwards of five hundred knights made by the French.
When the king of England found himself master of the field of battle, and that the French, excepting such as had been killed or taken, were flying in all directions, he made the circuit of the plain, attended by his princes; and while his men were employed in stripping the dead, he called to him the French herald, Montjoye, king-at-arms, and with him many other French and English heralds, and said to them, “It is not we who have made this great slaughter, but the omnipotent God, and, as we believe, for a punishment of the sins of the French.” He then asked Montjoye, to whom the victory belonged; to him, or to the king of France Montjoye replied, that the victory was his, and could not be claimed by the king of France. The king then asked the name of the castle he saw near him: he was told, it was called Azincourt. “Well then,” added he, “since all battles should bear the names of the fortress nearest to the spot where they were fought, this battle shall, from henceforth, bear the everdurable name of Azincourt.”
The English remained a considerable time on the field, and seeing they were delivered from their enemies, and that night was approaching, they retreated in a body to Maisoncelles, where they had lodged the preceding night: they again fixed their quarters there, carrying with them many of their wounded. After they had quitted the field of battle, several of the French, half dead and wounded, crawled away into an adjoining wood, or to some villages, as well as they could, where many expired. On the morrow, very early, king Henry dislodged with his army from Maisoncelles, and returned to the field of battle: all the French they found there alive were put to death or made prisoners. Then, pursuing their road toward the sea-coast, they marched away: three parts of the army were on foot, sorely fatigued with their efforts in the late battle, and greatly distressed by famine and other wants. In this manner did the king of England return, without any hindrance, to Calais, rejoicing at his great victory, and leaving the French in the utmost distress and consternation at the enormous loss they had suffered.
CHAPTER cxlvii.--THE NAMEs of THE PRINCEs, ANd other LoRDS FROM Divers counTRIES, WHO PERISHED AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BATTLE, AND OF THose who were MADE PRISONErs.
HERE follow the names of those lords and gentlemen who were slain at the battle of Azincourt, on the side of the French.
We shall begin with the king's officers: the lord Charles d'Albreth, constable of France!, the marshal Boucicaut $, carried a prisoner to England, where he died, sir James de Chastillon, lord de Dampierre ||, admiral of France, the lord de Rambures, master of the cross-bows, sir Guichard Daulphin, master of the king's households. Of the princes were, duke Anthony of Brabant, brother to the duke of Burgundy", Edward duke of Bar, the duke d'Alençon, the count de Nevers, brother to the duke of Burgundy, sir Robert de Bar, count de Marle, the count de Vaudemont, John brother to the duke of Bar, the count de Blaumont, the count de Grand-pré, the count de Roussy, the count de Fauquembergh, sir Louis de Bourbon, son to the lord de Préaux. The names of other great lords, as well from Picardy as elsewhere: the vidame of Amiens, the lord de Croy", and his son sir John de Croy, the lords de Helly, d'Auxit, de Brimeu, de Poix, l'Estendart, lord de Crequit, the lord de Lauvroy, sir Vitart de Bours, sir Philippe d'Auxi, lord de Dampierreş, bailiff of Amiens, his son the lord de Raineval||, his brother sir Alain, the lord de Mailly", and his eldest son the lord d'Inchy, sir William de Saveuses, the lord de Neufville, and his son the castellan of Lens, sir John de Moreul, sir Rogue de Poix, sir John de Bethune, lord of Moreul in Brie”, sir Symon de Craon, lord de Clarsyth, the lord de Rocheguyonfi, and his brother the vidame de Launois, the lord de Galigny, the lord d'AlegrešŠ in Auvergne, the lord de Bauffremont in Champagne, sir James de Heus||, the lord de Saint Bris, Philippe de Fosseux, sir Regnault de Crequy, lord de Comptes, and his son sir Philippe, the lord de Mannes, and his brother Lancelot, Mathieu and John de Humieres Toss, brothers, sir Louis de Beausault, the lord de Ront, sir Raoul de Manne, sir Oudart de Renty, and two of his brothers ***, the lord d'Applincourt, and his son sir James, sir Louis de Guistelle, the lord de Vaurin, and his son the lord de Lidequerke, sir James de Lescuelle, the lord de Hames, the lord de Hondescocte, the lord de Pulchres, sir John Baleul, sir Raoul de Flandres, sir Collart de Fosseux, the lord de Roissimbos, and his brother Louis de Boussy, the lord de Thiennes, the lord d'Azincourt and his son, sir Hustin Kierettff, le bêgue de Caen and his brother Payen, the lord de Varigines, the lord d'Auffemont off and his son sir Raulequin, sir Raoul de Neele, the lord de St. Crépin, the viscount de Quesnes, sir Pierre de Beauvoir, bailiff of the Vermandois, sir John de Lully and his brother sir Griffon, the lord de St. Symon and his brother Gallois $$$, Collart de la Porte, lord of Bellincourt, sir Yvain de Cramailles, the lord de Cerny in the Laonnois, sir Drieu d'Orgiers, lord de Bethencourt, sir Gobert de la Bove, lord de Savoisy, the lord de Becqueville * and his son sir John Marthel, the lord d'Utrecht, the seneschal d'Eu, the lord de la Riviere, de Tybouville, the lord de Courcy, the lord de St. Beuve, the lord de Beaumainnil +, the lord de Combouchis, the lord de la Heuse, the lord Viesport, sir Bertrand Painel, the lord Chambois, the lord de St. Cler, the lord de Montcheveul, the lord d'Ouffrevillei, sir Enguerrand de Fontaines and his brother sir Charles, sir Almaury de Craon, lord de Brolay $, the lord de Montejan, the lord de la Haye, the lord de l'Isle-Bouchart, sir John de Craon, lord de Montbason ||, the lord de Bueuil T, the lord de Laumont-sur-Loire, sir Anthony de Craon, lord de Beau Vergier **, the lord d'Asse, the lord de la Tour tit, the lord de l'Isle-Gonnort, sir John de Dreux, sir Germain de Dreux, the viscount de Tremblay, sir Robert de Bouvay, sir Robert de Challusi, sir John de Bonnebault, the lord de Mongaugier §§, sir John de Valcourt, the lord de Sainteron, sir Ferry de Sardonne, sir Peter d'Argie, sir Henry d'Ornay, the lord des Roches, sir John de Montenay, the lord de Bethencourt, the lord de Combourt, the viscount de la Belliere ||, the lord de la Tute, sir Bertrand de Montauban's", Bertrand de St. Gille, seneschal of Hainault, the lord de la Hamecte, the lord du Quesnoy, the lord de Montigny, the lord de Quiervran, the lord de Jumont, the lord de Chin, sir Symon de Havrech, the lord de Poctes, sir John de Gres, sir Allemand d'Estaussines, sir Philippe de Lens***, and sir Henry, brothers to the bishop of Cambray, sir Michel du Chastellier and his brother Guillaume de Vaudripont, Ernoul de Vaudrigien, Pierre de Molin, Jean de Buait, George de Quiervran and his brother Henry, the lord de Saures, sir Briffault his brother, le Baudrain d’Aisne knight, sir Maillart d’Azouville Palamedes des Marquais, the lord de Bousincourt, the lord de Fresencourt, the lord de Vallusant, the lord de Hectrus, Guernier de Brusquent, the lord de Moy in the Beauvoisis, his son Gamot de Bournouville and his brother Bertrand, Louvelet de Massinguehen and his brother, sir Collart de Phiennes, Alain de Vendôme, Lamont de Launoy, sir Colinet de St. Py, the lord de Bos d'Ancquin, Lancelot de Fremeusent, the lord d'Aumont +++, sir Robinet de Vaucoux, sir Raisse de Moncaurel off, sir Lancelot de Clary, the lord de la Rachie, sir Guerard d'Herbaines, sir Guerard de Haucourt, sir Robert de Montigny, sir Charles de Montigny, sir Charles de Chastillon $$$, Philippe de Poitiers, the lord de Feuldes, the lord de St. Pierre, Guillaume Fortescu, Burel de Guerames, Robert de Potiaumes, the son to the bailiff of Rouen, the provost to the marshals of France, Bertrand de Belloy ||, Jacques de Han, the lord de Baisir and Martel du Vauhuon his brother, Jean de Maletraicts, Raoul de Ferrieres, Raoul de Longeul knight, Henry de la Lande, sir Ernault de Corbie, lord d'Aniel, Jean Discolievelle, sir Yvain de Beauval, sir Brunel Fretel, le Baudrain de Belloy knight, sir Regnault d'Azincourt, the governor of the county of Rethel, Ponce de Salus knight, lord of Chastel-neuf, the lord de Marquectes, Symmonet de Morviller,
* This account of the loss of the English, is much more probable than that given by most English historians, who state that the total loss amounted to only forty.—Ed.
f He was very corpulent, and is said to have been pressed to death in the throng. The earl of Suffolk was also among the slain.
† Charles d'Albret, count de Dreux, succeeded by his son Charles II.
§ Boucicaut died in England two years after. He left no issue.
| He married Jane de la Riviere, and had issue by her one son, James II., lord de Dampierre, who served the dauphin faithfully, and was made grand-pannetier de France.
* The name of sir Guichard Dauphin appears to have betrayed Shakspeare into the error of making the Dauphin of France present at the battle of Azincourt, which he was not, unless we suppose the error to lie with the editors, in confounding two persons meant by Shakspeare to be distinct. In the camp scene before the battle, his dauphin does not hold such a rank in the debate and conversation as is suitable to the heir of the French monarchy, but precisely that which the master of the household might hold with propriety. In one scene, he is thus mentioned, “Enter Rambures, Châtillon, Dauphin, and others.”
* Of the princes, Anthony, duke of Brabant, left two sons, Philip and John, successively dukes of Brabant, and both dying s. p., Philip count of Nevers left Charles
count of Nevers, who died s. p., and John, count of
| Raoul II., lord of Rayneval, grand-pannetier de
* William Martel, lord of Bacqueville, often men-
a law-family, and Q. if any of the branches were addicted
Foleville, butler to the duke of Aquitaine, Gallois de Fougiers, sir Lancelot de Rubempré,
* Hector de Chartres, lord of Ons-en-Bray, grand master of waters and forests in Normandy, father of Renaud, archbishop of Rheims and chancellor of France.
+ Perhaps a son of the mareschal Neufville, who succeeded to the estates of sir Arnold d'Andreghen in 1370.
# I can find no such name as Hangiers; but John W. lord de Hangest, grand-master of cross-bows from 1407 to 1411, was killed here.
§ John de Mailly, lord of Authuille and Warans, one of the twenty-five sons of Giles, lord of Authuille. This was a branch of the lords de Mailly before-mentioned.
| Guy II. de la Val, lord of Retz and Blazon, is said, by Moreri, to have died before 1416. He was father of the infamous marshal de Retz, by Mary of Craon.