Medieval Military Combat (slight return)

 Just over a year ago I reviewed Dr Tom Lewis's 'Medieval Military Combat' and so too, albeit in a more dismissive fashion, did Graham Evans over at 'Wargaming for Grown-ups'. In Volume XXXII of The Ricardian, journal of the Richard III Society and hot off the presses, is another review. This one is by Peter Hammond, Research Officer of the society, and author of many books on the period himself. 

He is of much the same mind as me on Lewis's tome. His concluding paragraph reads:

"This book is an interesting mixture. As described it contains some interesting practical points which are not usually discussed. It is not well written, being badly organized but it is worth reading for the discussion of battle aspects not often covered. Unfortunately there are very few illustrations, all in black and white and very badly reproduced and the index is poor."

So, worth a read, but borrow don't buy.

PotCIIIPouri

 Well, here we are, April 11th, and there's a blizzard outside. On top of which the radio appears to have been hijacked by North Korea and is paying non-stop tribute to Kim Jong Phil, who has apparently left us at a tragically young age. 

Young people undertaking their Gold Award expedition

When I was last here it was for a book review. Trebian, over at Wargaming for Grown-ups, has now reviewed the same book, and it seems to have not gone down terribly well. I think our overall conclusions aren't that different - read the book, but make sure that it's someone else's copy - but for once I have been outintemperated (*). A suspiciously large part of his beef with the book seems to be that Dr Lewis hadn't read his (Graham Evans' aka Trebian's) book on Edgecote/Edgcote. I have read it and can confirm that it is a lot better than Dr Lewis' book, but if anyone genuinely thinks that 'Medieval Combat' is the worst book they've ever read then I can only suggest that they are not reading enough books.

According to obituaries that I have seen - not one of which, by the way, mentions the fact that he arranged the murder of Princess Diana - Baron Greenwich didn't have that problem, and in fact owned 11,000 books including many of poetry; so props to him. I am proud to say that this blog can exclusively reveal his favourite poem from among that large collection, one that befits both an old salt like him and this poignant moment in our nation's history:

There was a young sailor from Brighton

Who said to his girl "That's a tight one"

She exclaimed "Bless my soul

You're in the wrong hole

But there's plenty of room in the right one."

* This is definitely a word.

Edgcote 1469

I have been reading 'The Battle of Edgecote 1469' by Graham Evans, who you may be familiar with as the man behind 'Wargaming for Grown-ups', on which he features a whole range of stuff, from Ancient Assyrians (with plenty of chariots) right through to the Spanish Civil War. He makes wide use of 20mm plastic in his games, which is obviously a good thing. He is the secretary of the Northamptonshire Battlefields Society and they are the publishers of this book. You may have possibly, as I have a couple of times, had a go at his clever participation game of the Battle of Northampton which he regularly takes to conventions. And on top of all that he rocks the bald head and glasses look, which I always think is de rigeur for a distinguished wargames blogger.

The book is subtitled 'Re-evaluating the evidence' and that's what he does, explaining how he comes to his conclusions and how much conjecture is involved. He also reproduces a fair number of his sources including some fifteenth century Welsh poetry. As with pretty much all Wars of the Roses battles there is uncertainty about where it was fought and why some of those in the vicinity took themselves off rather than join in as they were expected to, and the author's conclusions are persuasively argued. He also clears up an issue that I previously had no idea was even up for debate, namely the date the battle took place. He makes a good case that it was on the 24th July, two days earlier than traditionally believed, and driven by the new chronology puts forward a plausible narrative for the period either side: from the skirmish as the vanguards met until Edward IV was arrested in his bed by the Archbishop of York. I think it's fair to say that he is agnostic as to the identity of Robin of Redesdale, the leader - assuming he existed in the first place - of the rebel forces on the day. I rather liked the option he explores of it being a sort of pseudonym for the collective leadership; reminiscent of the P O'Neill who always communicated on behalf of the Provisional IRA.

Anyone who has read his blog will know, Evans has a minor bee in his bonnet about the Battle of Towton not having been the largest and bloodiest battle in England after all, and he manages to inveigle that in here as well. However, unless one is strongly invested in the generally accepted view I don't think it makes much difference and I certainly agree with his overall point that these battles really cannot have involved as many men on either side as the chroniclers suggest. To quote from the book: "The willingness to accept that armies larger than the population of London marched and fought in a small area of the East Midlands should give us all pause for thought.".

Overall, it's an interesting and enlightening read which I thoroughly recommend to those keen on the period. Edgcote may well be creeping up the list of games to be played in the annexe. Most importantly I have just the figure to represent the Barmaid of Banbury:

If you want to know what role - or indeed roll - the barmaid performed then you'll need to read the book yourself, although here's a clue:

Arglwfdd difwynswydd Defnsir

A ffoes - ni chafas oes hir!

Gavrilo Princip claims more victims

 There was an article on the First World War in the latest edition of Miniature Wargames that rather caused me to shake my head when I read it. Subsequently I have learned that it was written by Trebian, owner of Wargaming for Grown-Ups, a blog and indeed an approach to life of which I thoroughly approve. There has been much discussion in the comments section of said blog - some by me - as to whether a) he is right in what he writes in the article and b) whether anyone should be allowed to tell him that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

I make no comment on point a) except to quote Voltaire: "Cherish those who seek the truth, but beware those who find it."

Regarding point b) I must once again fall back on the words of others:

"The aim of argument, or discussion, should not be victory, but progress." - Joseph Joubert

"Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

I think the author is being somewhat disingenuous when being surprised that the article is interpreted as right-wing. Whilst I do not doubt his assertion that he had no such intention he cannot have been unaware of the attempt by certain politicians to use the anniversary of the Great War to strengthen the cultural and philosophical hegemony which they already enjoy. Whether some right wing historians such as Alan Clark take a different view or whether left wing historians are themselves at odds (as pointed out vociferously by Keith Flett, he of the Beard Liberation Front and the letters page of any newspaper that one opens) is irrelevant to that point.

As for Henry Hyde, I think the article a mistake. I don't like to be lectured in the pages of a hobby magazine. And the furore has deflected attention from what surely should have been the main talking point of this issue - the Royal Mail's ban on carrying paint. I've signed the petition, have you?

Pot20pouri

 For anyone who knows an inveterate rule tweaker there is an interesting observation buried in a game report on Trebian's 'Wargaming for Grown-ups" blog. He postulates a cycle in respect of wargames rules like the Five Stages of Grief (Denial, Anger etc). It all makes perfect sense to me.

The angels ponder a D8 defence dice

 I am also most concerned about the fate of Comrade Chang Song-thaek. Apparently his crimes include 'drinking, gambling and womanising'. Frankly if that sort of behaviour is to be held against people then which of us can truly consider ourselves safe?

Your bloggist has left the building