What if Henry V outlived Charles VI

[Vera Strawberry]

In 1420, English control over France seemed inevitable. The signing of the Treaty of Troyes guaranteed that Henry V and his heirs would inherit the French throne after the death of French king Charles VI. But Henry died just two months before Charles did, undermining the treaty.

What if Henry had at least survived long enough to be come King of France?

 

[Grimbald]

The French would have rebelled against Lancaster rule until they won albeit at a different date and place. England could not rule Franve indefinitely without becoming French. The larger culture usually prevails.

 

[material_boy]

How much longer ...?

 

[ordinarylittleme]

Well then Henry would succeed, but after his death things would be like IOTL, as his son was not exactly useful as king

 

[DracoLazarus]

I suspect many of the French institutions would refuse to acknowledge the Treaty of Troyes' provisions either way.
You wouldn't see much difference unless Henry V takes the field... and if he does and dies there, it's even worse for the English morale.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

I suspect many of the French institutions would refuse to acknowledge the Treaty of Troyes' provisions either way.
You wouldn't see much difference unless Henry V takes the field... and if he does and dies there, it's even worse for the English morale.

Well what would happen if he DOESN'T die there?

 

[DracoLazarus]

Well what would happen if he DOESN'T die there?

He is a good general, so perhaps they would manage to get a bit further South before being inevitably overstretched.

 

[material_boy]

He is a good general, so perhaps they would manage to get a bit further South before being inevitably overstretched.

Their bigger problem in the near term would be Brittany, which was routinely flip-flopped between the two sides. OTL Bedford's conquest of France "only" made it as far as the Loire because Brittany repudiated Troyes and attacked Normandy, forcing the English to fight a two-year war in western France before Brittany switched back to their side.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

Their bigger problem in the near term would be Brittany, which was routinely flip-flopped between the two sides. OTL Bedford's conquest of France "only" made it as far as the Loire because Brittany repudiated Troyes and attacked Normandy, forcing the English to fight a two-year war in western France before Brittany switched back to their side.

Well, considering Henry was overtly aggressive in his policy, maybe he'd attempt to actually conquer Britanny and get rid of it's ducal family. It would be unjustified but if Britanny switched to Charles VII Henry can declare Breton duke unloyal vassal and "strip" him from his dignity giving it to person of his choosing (maybe Bedford). It'd give Charles VII a lot of time but I wouldn't exclude Henry trying to adopt defensive strategy near Loire and return once he'll get rid of Breton current ducal family.

 

[DracoLazarus]

Well, considering Henry was overtly aggressive in his policy, maybe he'd attempt to actually conquer Britanny and get rid of it's ducal family. It would be unjustified but if Britanny switched to Charles VII Henry can declare Breton duke unloyal vassal and "strip" him from his dignity giving it to person of his choosing (maybe Bedford). It'd give Charles VII a lot of time but I wouldn't exclude Henry trying to adopt defensive strategy near Loire and return once he'll get rid of Breton current ducal family.

That, ironically, would make Brittany much closer to France emotionally...
and would overstretch English resources even further.

 

[ordinarylittleme]

Well, considering Henry was overtly aggressive in his policy, maybe he'd attempt to actually conquer Britanny and get rid of it's ducal family. It would be unjustified but if Britanny switched to Charles VII Henry can declare Breton duke unloyal vassal and "strip" him from his dignity giving it to person of his choosing (maybe Bedford). It'd give Charles VII a lot of time but I wouldn't exclude Henry trying to adopt defensive strategy near Loire and return once he'll get rid of Breton current ducal family.

It'd be very difficult to conquer Brittany and keep it loyal...

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

That, ironically, would make Brittany much closer to France emotionally...
and would overstretch English resources even further.

It'd make Bretons closer to France emotionally with no doubt (but did Henry care about it?), but I don't think it'd multiply overstretching, defense is easier than offense and Britanny is far closer to English base lands than lands south of Loire.

It'd be very difficult to conquer Brittany and keep it loyal...

It'd be also difficult to conquer France and keep it loyal yet Henry tried to do exactly that...

 

[DracoLazarus]

It'd make Bretons closer to France emotionally with no doubt (but did Henry care about it?), but I don't think it'd multiply overstretching, defense is easier than offense and Britanny is far closer to English base lands than lands south of Loire.

It'd be also difficult to conquer France and keep it loyal yet Henry tried to do exactly that...

The issue is, the more English troops he has stuck in garrisons in Northern France, the fewer he has to actually fight the French South of the Loire.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

The issue is, the more English troops he has stuck in garrisons in Northern France, the fewer he has to actually fight the French South of the Loire.

Well the strategy proposed by me is that English troops would have to defend themselves (and that would be IMHO easier than fighting French in open field) while Henry tries to yeet Britanny.

 

[DracoLazarus]

Well the strategy proposed by me is that English troops would have to defend themselves (and that would be IMHO easier than fighting French in open field) while Henry tries to yeet Britanny.

Then France goes back to the Charles V strategy. Sieges, sieges, sieges.
And it's a strategy which worked IOTL.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

Then France goes back to the Charles V strategy. Sieges, sieges, sieges.
And it's a strategy which worked IOTL.

Well, I think stalemating French on Loire would be doable and England didn't hold Paris during Charles V's lifetime.

 

[DracoLazarus]

Well, I think stalemating French on Loire would be doable and England didn't hold Paris during Charles V's lifetime.

I don't think it's sustainable.
Eventually the French will be able to make their way across the Loire, either because of a jacquerie or internal English trouble, or just a Joan of Arc equivalent. Or Henry V kicking the bucket.
And after that, they'll snowball.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

I don't think it's sustainable.
Eventually the French will be able to make their way across the Loire, either because of a jacquerie or internal English trouble, or just a Joan of Arc equivalent. Or Henry V kicking the bucket.
And after that, they'll snowball.

Well Henry V doesn't know when he will die, population of Paris is rather well-disposed towards him so it'd make sense for him to campaign in Britanny and than return south with offensive with Breton problem being nullified.

 

[DracoLazarus]

Well Henry V doesn't know when he will die, population of Paris is rather well-disposed towards him so it'd make sense for him to campaign in Britanny and than return south with offensive with Breton problem being nullified.

Oh, I agree.
My personal opinion is that Henri V cannot win in the long-term, though.

 

[Zygmunt Stary]

Oh, I agree.
My personal opinion is that Henri V cannot win in the long-term, though.

Well, my personal opinion is that I don't really know whether Henry V could win or not, but I'd bet on English still losing, though maybe not as badly as IOTL.