WI : Verneuil 1424, the revenge on Agincourt

Here's a link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Verneuil .

The battle was rather well engaged for the French side. The archers on Bedford's right flank had been caught unprepared and smashed by cavalry, but rather than exploiting this breakthrough, the cavalry prefered to go after the English bagage train, allowing Bedford to reform his lines and decisively counter attack and rout the French army.

My idea is about a scenario where this breakthrough is exploited. A big English defeat is in the cards, maybe with either Bedford either killed or captured, which would have big consequences back in England with the Duke of Gloucester taking advantage of his brother's demise to take over the government. A point to note is Gloucester's ambitions in Netherlands that put England in collision course with Duke Philip of Burgundy's own ambitions in the region. IOTL, only the interventions of Bedford prevented the situation from degenerating too quickly; ITTL, we could imagine that Gloucester clashes with Burgundians leads to an earlier Arras Treaty.

The battle is also notorious for having an important contingent of Scots come to Dauphin Charles rescue, but the defeat was at a heavy cost for them and they ceased to play a significant role in the war after that battle. In a victory scenario, I could imagine that their influence in the cour could match that of Yolande of Aragon and Richemont, but I wonder if there is potential for them to ally.
 
Last edited:
No thought?

What about Scotland? And what about the struggle between Duke Humphrey and the Beaufort family with an earlier demise of Bedford?
 
Hi,

It seems that Verneuil was the example of both English armies superiority in the field as English commanders.

They won without the archers, which were smashed by the cavalry, which, by the way, was Italian mercenaries (something I never understand why). The French were defeated hand to hand, by an inferior force, prove that they sucked as moral.

Now, the consequences could be multiples... Even butterfly Joan of Arc, maybe precipitating the War of Roses, the defection of Burgundy, as you said.

Sadly, it's not quite my period of confidence to give you more insights about the possible consequences.
 
I wouldn't say that.

English armies had good commanders and had for long held tactical superiority, but their tactics remained more or less the same from Crécy to Agincourt.
Strategically, the French had always had the advantage with superior resources in manpower and finances, while the English crown always struggled to raise funds to fund expeditions.
Taking lessons from Crécy and Poitiers, Charles V and du Guesclin set the French strategy of reconquest for the next century after the end of Brétigny peace, namely avoiding open battles and favoring sieges and methodical approach, forcing England into a war of attrition it hasn't never been able to sustain. Only the madness of Charles VI and the Armagnac-Burgundy feud allowed a brief resurgence under Henry V.
At the war's end, France's superior resources would even allow it to surpass England on the tactical field with the development of the most powerful and feared artillery in Europe, one to remain so well into the Italian Wars.

Of note, Verneuil was only five years ahead of Patay.

By this time anyway, the English are in no good shape. Bretons were playing on both sides (Arthur de Richemont, the Duke's brother served under Dauphin Charles) and Normandy was ripped with guerilla and lawlessness (the region was so dangerous that in 1431 for his coronation, Henry VI barely stayed a few days in Paris before rushing under heavy guard back to England, never to set foot in France again).
 
Top