Medieval UK Battle Records Released Online

eldavojohn writes "Do you have ancestors who served in the British military under Henry V or fought in the Hundred Years War? Look them up online now that 250,000 medieval battle records are online and available for searching. According to the project details (PDF): 'The main campaigns of the period were to France but there were others to Flanders, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Wales and Scotland, a much wider geographical spectrum than before 1369. In addition, garrisons were maintained within England (such as that held at the Tower of London), the Channel Islands, Wales and the marches, as well as at Calais and in Gascony. In the fourteenth-century phase of the Hundred Years War, the English also held some garrisons in areas of northern France, and in the fifteenth century phase, there was a systematic garrison-based occupation of Normandy and surrounding regions...'"

Comments

Lots of blokes called John

[fantomas]

Lots of records with no family /surname. "What's your name soldier?" "John" "Right, stick him down scribe, John the archer".

Don't hold your hopes out if you were dreaming to find your ancestor on some particular march out to France or Scotland. Not unless your ancestors happen to be the Dukes of Northumberland or the like...

Re:Lots of blokes called John

[Daimanta]

I actually looked up the first name of John as it would return something with near 100% success rate and a lot of Johns have surnames and looking at the nature of these names(names not directly refering to objects, professions or places), I'd say a good bunch are not invented on the spot.

For a great study on Agincourt...

[tcopeland]

...check out John Keegan's Face of Battle. It covers the battle of Agincourt and several other major battles - Waterloo and the Somme. This book really gives you a feel for the human element in these battles.

As an additional stamp of approval, it's also on both the Army and USMC reading lists.

Re:Beancounters in the day...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Actually, bureaucrats were a creation of the monarchy and essential to their attempts at absolutism.

Before bureaucracy, the king's only way of making something happen beyond his own landholdings was to apply pressure down a chain of one or more (generally recalcitrant) nobles who theoretically owed him ties of obedience and/or kinship; but, in practice, enjoyed considerable autonomy. Bureaucrats, by contrast, were simply commons with technical skills(yes, reading, writing, and bookkeeping count, even when you don't do them with computers) and depended directly on the monarchy for their positions.

Everybody loves to hate them, and sometimes they deserve it; but bureaucracy is one of the defining characteristics of the move from feudalism to the nation-state.

Re:Stupid and short sighted

[Futurepower(R)]

"Trebuchet... catapult"

Slashdot readers put a lot of mental effort into being funny. Often Slashdot story comments are dominated by humor.

Another subject: The story to which Slashdot could have linked: Was your ancestor a social climbing soldier in the Hundred Years War?. That story leads to a story that contains a link to the database. I didn't want to post that link because it might be Slashdotted.

England and France

[meehawl]

I should add these population numbers:
1350, England: 2,500,000
1345, France: 20,200,000

Re:Battle Results: Warning: spoiler!!!!

[sqldr]

the English owned Normandy

It was the other way around. The Normans invaded in 1066 and annexed England. After that, things got complicated.

Re:Braveheart

[bw-sf]

Scotland is not now, and never has been, part of England.

The great UK Venn Diagram

[Weaselmancer]

Is here. Share and enjoy.