MEDIEVAL DEPTH Study 2: Henry V and the Conquest of France 1413-1421 Flashcards
Why did English kings claim the throne of France?
Edward III descended from House of Capet, a family that ruled France in the 10th century.
In 1360, Edward signed Treaty of Bretigny with France which gave up his claim in return for land.
How did renewing war with France prove Henry V as a military leader?
River Somme- pushed his troops hard to get them ahead of the French mirroring them on the other side of the River Somme, and then dispersed the French so when they did cross when they had half a days advance on the French, they were met with practically no resistance.
Battle of Agincourt- 80% archers, some would sneak from behind and attack, and light armour. French formation was awful and heavy. Henry went around rallying everyone up on the dancefloor. Sign from God as rightful king of England and divine approval for claims in France.
He had little opposition from other threats such as Wales (due to councilable treatment and pardening rebels) and Brittany (10 year truce).
How did renewing war with France reduce the threat from France?
This had been particularly bad for his father Henry IV in terms of French naval raid on the south coast.
However, Henry taking lands would massively weaken the French, both physically, and psychologically (morale).
Also, his 10 year peace truce with John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, as a tactic to limiting Frances support would’ve reduced their threat to England after the French campaign as well.
Victory led to France having to agree to the Treaty of Troyes 1520, which was extremely significant as it stated that after the death of Charles VII, that Henry V was next in line to the throne.
How did renewing war with France improve Henry V’s relationship with nobles and parliament?
Henry’s success in France proved to parliament that he was a strong and capable monarch, which meant they were much more willing to provide him with financial assistance. (i.e.) before Henry V even arrived him from Agincourt, parliament had decided to grant him very generous revenue from taxation.
In terms of other nobles- they were able to respect him as a king as the two criteria needed for great king was military ability and bringing justice to the land. They would have also liked him because he was able to give out lots of land as rewards. Can also be proved by the fact that he only faced one serious rebellion- Southampton plot 1415- and even this was snitched about by Edmund Mortimer.
What is some evidence that lollardy was supported by high-ranking members of society?
John of Gaunt (Henry V’s own grandfather!) who used Wycliffe’s talent for theology to help argue that England should stop sending money to Rome.
Evdent by the fact that the Lollards were particularly noted for translating scriptures from Latin into English. A number of these manuscripts were in very high quality, which suggests the movement had supporters in the higher ranks for society.
The University of Oxford may have also sheltered lollardy under the argument of academic freedom, and so this allowed Lollardy to continue.
What would’ve been the impact of Lollardy being supported by high-ranking members of society?
Wycliffe’s support from some members of the higher ranks of society would have
- Encouraged others to join the cause.
- For the threat to last longer than if nobody higher up supported it, as Henry V may have felt worried that a brutal response to Lollardy could have lost him support.
What was the Lollard Rebellion against the crown and what happened?
The Lollard rebellion of January 1414- Oldcastle led followers to St Giles’ Field in London. They wanted to kidnap king and force him to accept Lollard views, or murder to replace with Oldcastle.
79 Lollards executes, and authorities sent around to capture and execute more.
Oldcastle escaped though….
Only captured in December 1417 in Wales.
What was the successful impact that the Lollard Rebellion 1414 had on Henry V?
Nota significant threat because Henry made careful use of spies and intelligence networks, and he was informed of the plot. This helped Henry to consolidate the power of spies, and also prevented a threat to his reign from becoming serious.
Also, the Statute of Lollard was enacted which increased the role of the secular authorities in the investigation of heresy (i.e.) JPs were now more active in searching for Lollardy. This clearly would have had some importance for the future of Henry’s reign as he didn’t face another Lollard rebellion.
What became the long-term negative consequence of Lollardy in Henry V’s reign?
Oldcastle got away- hemayhave conspired with enemies of England. Although this did not lead to any direct rebellions, some with orthodox religious views were dissatisfied with the government, which is shown most dangerously in 1415 when many Lollards supported Southampton Plot.
Therefore a weakness in the royal response to heresy may have influence further rebellions.
What was the long-term positive consequence of Lollardy in Henry V’s reign?
Proved him as a defender of the realm, especially since part of the role of King was a religious role.
It is likely that people of all ranks would’ve been impressed by his swift defeat of the Lollards at St. Giles Field, and even more impressed when he continued his plan to embark on his French campaign straight after.
Something can be said by the fact that there were no rebellions in England, even when Henry was not in the country. Royal response clearly worked as a deterrent.
What was the disarray going on in French court?
When he had conquered Normandy by 1419, to consolidate his victory by making negotiations with France and Burgundy. Perfect timing as at this time there was piping hot tea between Armagnacs (supported by Dauphin Charles) and the Burgundians (i.e.) John the Fearless murdered by Armagnacs in revenge for murder of duke of Orleans, which meant Philip the Good was pissed and broke of negotiations with them for the English.
In regards to Henry V’s foreign policy wat were the consequences of the disarray going on in French court?
Anglo-Burgundian alliance was crucial to the continuing success of Henry V’s conquest.
Firstly, preventing French-Burgundian alliance which would have been disastrous as it could have driven English out of Normandy.
It also meant Philip supported Queen, who was much more open minded to coming to terms with English power (i.e.) Treaty of Troyes.
Explain the funding parliament gave Henry V to fund his 1417 invasion of France?
In order to fund his 1417 invasion of France he was going to need funds. This was because his diplomatic approach to conquering Normandy failed and so he wanted to take a more military approach.
He bought an army of several canons and over 10K army. This could not have been possible if it wasn’t for parliament voting for heavy taxation, and a number of loans.
In regards to Henry V’s foreign policy, what were the consequences of parliaments financial support?
This led to success as the English were able to engage in warfare against the heavily fortified French towns.
While the consequences were significant in that it gained him Normandy, it also had negative long-term consequences for England as it placed massive strain on crown finances. It became evident after the Treaty of Troyes that parliament didn’t want to fund anymore campaigns in France as they became more reluctant to fund him. Also shows the growing concern in royal finances.
What were Henry V’s timely actions in his French campaign?
River Somme.
Henry presented France with the Treaty of Troyes in 1520, once he had defeated French at Harfleur and Agincourt, and taken control of Normandy, which was a massive and hugely significant part of France. Not to mention he had allied with the Burgundians, which supported the queen, who was much more willing to come to terms with English authority. The timing of this meant that when Henry proposed the Treaty of Troyes, France had lost so much land that they were basically forced into submission!
