Hmmm, did Henry V really bayonet babies? Shakespeare didn't invent "your naked infants spitted upon pikes?" Well, you learn something new every day!

As to whether Shakespeare was ridiculing Henry's claims: I don't think so. I think he was showing that BOTH the French claim and Henry's claim were equally (in)valid, because both had resulted from someone at one time coming down through the female line, etc. Thus, France's refusal to pay tribute was no more legally grounded than Henry's invasion. Certainly Shakespeare was showing that the Church and Henry were in collusion to trump up a reason to invade, but beneath it all was the cynical knowledge that there WAS no right of the matter, that the ONLY thing determining who ruled was force of arms.