Loved:Bernard Cornwell’s attention to historical accuracy and detail is done with a historian’s acumen—that’s my first and biggest love for this novel, or at least the intellectual in me makes that claim. Like in a lot of historical fiction, there are a couple places where the author warps events slightly to fit his narrative, but this is done so minimally, and at the end of the novel, the author outs himself where his alterations occurred in the story in an appendix. To give you an idea of the kind of changes he made: there is a siege in the novel’s middle. It takes up a considerable portion of the book, this event really did happen, and the results of the siege happened in the same way as in the novel. What the author changed were little details about the siege tunnels the attackers used for story reasons. It’s not like the siege itself was invented.Also, I really appreciate Cornwell’s character work regarding the hero of the story and the major and minor characters that surround him. Cornwell understands that readers primarily want to get to know, relate to, and understand the protagonist and the people in his life. The plot, while important, isn’t worth anything if we don’t care about the people who live through that plot. Finally, and the real visceral reason I love this novel, Sir John Cornwall, no relation to the author, a major character in the story, a real person who fought at Agincourt, steals every scene he’s in from every other character. Every line of dialogue, every action he takes, if not over-the-top violence, suggests over-the-top violence—all that mixed with a heart of gold. An internal contrast of characteristics that jarring makes him by far the most fun character. The best way I can describe him is he’s exactly like a human grisly bear. From a distance, cute, maybe even heartwarming. Up close, he’ll tear your limbs off and probably enjoy doing so immensely.Didn't:For a novel about the battle of Agincourt, Agincourt is the seminal event of the story but only takes place at nearly the end. It’s a small quibble, but still, the book is titled Agincourt, and that battle is the last third of the end product. Another thing that happens a lot is that the plot relies heavily on coincidence—I’m forgiving of this point because, in the end, all events are really coincidences if you think about them too deeply.Also, as much as I love the protagonists and heroes of this novel, most of the story’s antagonists are of the mustache twirler kind of villain. They aren’t evil for a specific reason or are even particularly misguided in thinking they’re in the right, somehow. A lot of them are just evil for the sake of being evil. I’m not saying there aren’t people like that, sadly there are, but this is a trait I can’t usually find engaging—sometimes I can when it comes to non-human characters or entities, but since this is historical fiction, there are none of those on hand.Sure there is a paper-thin reason given for hostilities between the main character and his adversaries. They’re engaged in a long-standing family feud—but it isn’t like the evil murdering rapist priest is possessed—although he could be mad, it isn’t really clear. Mainly, he’s just a colossal jerk, whose only function in the story is that.