NEW PRODUCT: POPTOYS: 1/6 EX22 King Henry V of England, double head sculptures & horse

POPTOYS 1/6 EX22 King Henry V of England with two heads

POPTOYS 1/6 EX22 King Henry V of England-- Figure
BAR CODE: 6971281620741
List:
Young head*1
Head with beard*1
Body*1
Gloved hands*4
Red undershirt*1
Scarf*1
Pants*1 pair
Boots*1 pair
Upper body chain armor*1
Shoulder armor*2
Upper plate armor*1
Dagger (with scabbard)*1
Sword (with scabbard)*1
Leather belt*2
Imperial crown*1
Sleeveless robe*1
Figure stand*1
.................................................. ...............
POPTOYS 1/6 EX22 King Henry V of England –War horse

List:
Horse*1
Saddle*1
Stirrup*2
Horse face belt*1
Rein*1
Leather liner*1
Front belt*1
Back belt*1
























#newproduct #PopToys #KingHenryV #male #medieval #movie-based #horse #animal

I'm not at all sure about some of the details (most notably the armor), but it does look pretty neat. It might be based on one of the renditions of the Shakespeare play, although I haven't tried researching this.

I made some googling as the likeness was very strong to Tom Hiddlestone (Loki!)

It appears to be based on a tv movie from UK, adapted from shakespear's "hollow crown", henry V being the final part...

Here are some images, I find the set very accurate and well executed, at least that proto... very promising!

Good catch, blackpool. Haven’t seen that version, but I did like the Kenneth Brannagh version that came out twenty + years ago.

I had seen the movie but a while back -- must have been reacting to a vague memory of the actor's face, although the outfit didn't ring a bell anymore.

And here is the real Henry V... if only Tom had shaved and gotten a bowl cut...

I'm glad it is based on a movie because it has no basis in history.

It’s from The Hollow Crown! He was of course very good in the role, but I did find the costumes rather annoying. The first entry about Richard II was also excellent imo; I would have preferred figures made from that one.

That being said, I like the tack on the horse, even if this overly fantasy looking PopToys horse doesn’t really do it for me. But I’d get it just for the tack, as it would work for some medieval fantasy kitbashes I want to do ( in distant future, but one can never plan too far with these things...)

GubernatorFan wrote:I'm not at all sure about some of the details (most notably the armor), but it does look pretty neat. It might be based on one of the renditions of the Shakespeare play, although I haven't tried researching this.

To answer your question, in the late 14th and early 15th century, armor for a person of this stature would consist of full plate over mail. He would have been covered from head to foot.

shazzdan wrote:I'm glad it is based on a movie because it has no basis in history.

Exactly right. He should be wearing full plate armor and have a chili bowl haircut.

Yeah this is based on that TV Show. It looks to be a really good figure and one on my to be purchased list has

Does anyone actually Know what he wore at Agincourt?which is why I'd be interested in the Bow from the other set

I also wonder at the accuracy of some of the pictorial descriptions of famous people from the middle ages and even beyond

Delanie wrote:Does anyone actually Know what he wore at Agincourt?which is why I'd be interested in the Bow from the other set

I also wonder at the accuracy of some of the pictorial descriptions of famous people  from the middle ages and even beyond

this is based on the info from website agincourt600.com

When Henry V’s army departed in August 1415, between a quarter and a fifth of the soldiers were men-at-arms.

Most of these were of the status of esquire – indeed this term was often used in the muster rolls to describe them – and were paid one shilling per day (twice the rate of pay of an archer). Some were of noble and knightly rank and received higher rates of pay based on their social status. A duke, for instance, was paid 13 s 4d per day. In addition, captains received an additional payment (a regard) for their men-at-arms which was set at 100 marks for every 30 men at arms for every three month period. This was in recognition of the higher costs men-at-arms incurred in terms of equipment and armour.

Whatever their social status, these were all men who had been trained in arms and in horsemanship from an early age. In a battle situation such as Agincourt, they would fight on foot, armed with lances, swords and other staff weapons.

By 1415, fully articulated suits of plate armour, known as ‘white armour’ (harnois blanc) were in use by the men-at-arms. This included the use of various items such as breastplates, gorgets, rerebraces and sallets to protect different parts of the body. This equipment was vital for keeping a man-at-arms alive in the mêlée (the hand-to hand fighting in a battle).

Here is a brief glossary:

Bascinet – a type of helmet

Gauntlets – armoured gloves

Gorget – neck armour

Greaves – shin armour

Hauberk – a long mail shirt

Pairs of plates – cloth armour with riveted plates inside

Poleyns – knee armour

Rerebrace – upper arm armour

Sabaton – foot armour

Sallet – a type of helmet

Thanks for the Info Lurpdog it just occurred to me that what with the 'bowman' figure they might make a good set giving his classic lines from Shakespeare and was wondering if he would have had the full plate considering the terrain and weather at that time.

that being said I also wonder about the size of his shield it seems quite small from what i remember at Warwick

I hear you. He could well have originally had full plate armour. This is based on the tv show though, and I just looked it up and it is pretty good likeness on that front.

"He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day."

Delanie wrote:that being said I also wonder about the size of his shield it seems quite small from what i remember at Warwick

Doesn't matter what size it is because he never had one. It would be inaccurate no matter now big it is. There would not be much point wearing full plate if it couldn't stop an attack without the assistance of a shield. One advantage of full plate is that it enabled the shield to be discarded, which allowed two-handed weapons became prevalent, which leads us to another problem with this figure. Henry's primary weapon would have been a two-handed polearm not a sword. The sword would have been drawn only after his other weapons had been broken/disarmed.

and was wondering if he would have had the full plate considering the terrain and weather at that time.

Yes he wore full plate; all the nobility did at the time. Armour has never been selected based on the climate. We know that some of the heaviest and most stifling armours ever invented were worn in summer campaigns in the Middle East. I have personally worn these kinds of armours in the middle of an Australian summer with no more discomfort than regular clothing.

What causes heat issues is enclosed helmets. If the head is ventilated, a person can tolerate far higher degrees of heat. At the battle of Towton the prolonged melee caused some knights in enclosed helmets to collapse from heat exhaustion even though they were fighting in a snowstorm.

The thing I was thinking of was and it may not have been Agincourt were the boggy fields which prevented the heavily armoured French Cavalry and maybe even foot attacking effectively, in fact im sure i read that some had to remove their plate to escape the mud. so i thought perhaps knowing this Henry v may have worn lighter armour.


with regard to plate and shield were there not shields with cut outs to allow lances and swords to be used in conjunction?

I get what you are saying with regard to the weapons though as many weapons could not penetrate full plate unless they found a joint and even the 2 handed great sword was in effect a bludgeoning weapon either incapacitating the wearer by decreasing mobility or inflicting damage on the person beneath by concussion or restricting breathing or blood flow

Delanie wrote:with regard to plate and shield were there not shields with cut outs to allow lances and swords to be used in conjunction?

Only in tournaments. The shield was an integral part of the game.

I get what you are saying with regard to the weapons though as many weapons could not penetrate full plate unless they found a joint

How do you do this with a one handed weapon? You can't fight someone in full plate if you have a shield because both hands are needed for armour-compromising weapons. Even lower ranked soldiers with little armour did away with shields and adopted two handed weapons.

and even the 2 handed great sword was in effect a bludgeoning weapon either incapacitating the wearer by decreasing mobility or inflicting damage on the person beneath by concussion or restricting breathing or blood flow.

Two-handed swords were used like polearms to penetrate armour gaps. Thrusting attacks were prevalent.

lurpdog101 wrote:Hauberk – a long mail shirt

He probably didn't wear a hauberk. Arming doublets with mail voiders start to appear at the end of the 14th century. His armour would have been pointed to the doublet rather than strapped over a hauberk.

Pairs of plates – cloth armour with riveted plates inside

By this time, uncovered solid cuirasses were being worn (hence the term "all white"); pairs of plates were being phased out. The king would definitely not have worn something so old-fashioned; he was on the cutting edge of armour development. So, in this regard, the above figure is accurate.


Trivia sidebar: At the time, the word "pair" did not refer to two items. It referred to a group of related items. The closest modern translation would be "set of plates". Most armour researchers refer to this armour as a "coat of plates" to avoid confusion.

Probably wouldn't have sold if they'd done a historically accurate figure. They wanted to ride on the coat tails of HT's success without copying Loki.

CHEERS!

shazzdan wrote:

lurpdog101 wrote:Hauberk – a long mail shirt

He probably didn't wear a hauberk. Arming doublets with mail voiders start to appear at the end of the 14th century. His armour would have been pointed to the doublet rather than strapped over a hauberk.

Pairs of plates – cloth armour with riveted plates inside

By this time, uncovered solid cuirasses were being worn (hence the term "all white"); pairs of plates were being phased out. The king would definitely not have worn something so old-fashioned; he was on the cutting edge of armour development. So, in this regard, the above figure is accurate.


Trivia sidebar: At the time, the word "pair" did not refer to two items. It referred to a group of related items. The closest modern translation would be "set of plates". Most armour researchers refer to this armour as a "coat of plates" to avoid confusion.

The info I had wasn't directly for the King, as said, was taken from a historical website for Agincourt and seems to be general soldier.

lurpdog101 wrote:The info I had wasn't directly for the King, as said, was taken from a historical website for Agincourt and seems to be general soldier.

Less wealthy or provincial men at arms would still be wearing the older kit but the wealthy or ambitious nobles and everyone who attended court regularly would have been wearing modern armour.

Probably the only really accurate thing about this figure is the sword, which looks very much like the one purported to be Henry V's and appears to be an Oakshott type XVIII  as these things are classified. This being said, I see no reason not to buy this figure if you happen to really like it.

The love of this figure has led me back to look into history, as it's admittedly been a long time since I studied Henry V, both the historical figure and the Shakespearean one.

I was fascinated to (re)learn that in Henry's youth, he gained battle experience fighting against Owain Glyndŵr, leading army against him when he was only 15/16 years old! Owain Glyndŵr was the last native Welshman to hold the title Prince of Wales (the title of which was bestowed on Henry)

Owain Glyndŵr has a lot of history where I live, and I recall in my youth, our home on Anglesey, well, my parents cottage we went to on holidays (but as my dad was a minister, it was actually their own home) had graffiti on, and lucky not to have been firebombed like others in the village, by the "Sons of Glyndŵr" and within 50 miles I could reach either Owain Glyndŵr court in Macynlleth or where he held court in Harlech!

So my talk of wanting to photograph the figure in a local castle, would be amazing to have it done in Harlech Castle, where I am sure he must have fought. He was also given a title of Earl of Chester, which again, is within 30 minute drive.

Sorry for the ramble, but I do love history and am ashamed I forget a lot of it...so really pleased this figure has reignited my interest to read into it.

ThePhotogsBlog wrote:Probably the only really accurate thing about this figure is the sword, which looks very much like the one purported to be Henry V's and appears to be an Oakshott type XVIII  as these things are classified.  This being said, I see no reason not to buy this figure if you happen to really like it.  

It has lots of pieces that would be excellent in other builds, just not this one.

shazzdan wrote:

ThePhotogsBlog wrote:Probably the only really accurate thing about this figure is the sword, which looks very much like the one purported to be Henry V's and appears to be an Oakshott type XVIII  as these things are classified.  This being said, I see no reason not to buy this figure if you happen to really like it.  

It has lots of pieces that would be excellent in other builds, just not this one.

An interesting observation.