"Flodden - The King who rolled a one.." Topic

Having been working on a MAHOUSIVE Flodden project in 10mm for the last year, an opportunity presented itself to visit the battlefield as part of a Jolly-Wargamers Scotland and Borders odyssey… So the three of us rocked up to Stirling, did Banockburn etc. etc.. and then the Flodden day arrived.

Now I have read pretty much everything there is on Flodden, both primary historical sources as well as some excellent interpretations of the battle… but what I found when I actualy got there and walked the battlefield has given me fresh insight into this battle.. so much so that I want to share..

First, the topography of the area is such that there are massive amounts of hidden ground.. hillocks, ridges, valleys make the terrain a very difficult.. it is easy to see how the English were able to pull away from Flodden ridge and flank the Scots without ever being noticed.

Second, Branxton Hill (the Scots position)… is such a HUGE hill. The position is extremely steep and represents a commanding view.. however it is perhaps too perfect a positon… from the top of it, the whole landscape in front looks relatively flat – certainly the land in front looks no more than small undulations…. James would have been presented with a view of a much smaller English army well below them in terms of topography….When you descend to the bottom, what you actually find is that Flodden field is actually a valley…the area occupied by the English forces is not flat.. in fact the opposite is true.. the Scots would been hit by the boggy ground, losing unit cohesion, and then would have been faced with a fairly steep rise to meet their foes… we figured that the rise is actually around 20 feet in 100 paces – so very steep especially if you are holding a pike and have spent all you engery coming down a really steep hill, trying to maintain order, and then got caught in the mud at the bottom.

The issue of ames not scouting the land – well as he was forced to adopt the position and then found the English waiting he would not really have had a chance… added to this, Lord Home who successfully led a charge to his left was not actualy encumbered by boggy ground – the land on the left is higher than the land in the centre by a substantial degree – the water would have therefore collected in the middle of the field. James would have seen a succesful charge go in and assume that the status of the field was the same to his front. By the time he would have known about the mud and the incline to the English position it would have been too late to do anything as he was already committed…

So IMHO James was not the tactical twazzock that he is often made out to be… he was the victim of over-confidence and a set of circumstances that consipred against him… in a very real sense, James rolled a one.

I totally concur! – Living in beautiful Northumberland myself, Flodden field is in easy reach.
At least this battlefield is in a fairly original state making the battle much easier to understand.
One thing I wonder though, how did King James get his artillery into position to fire on the English. Those scots must have been very strong!!!

Thats an interesting one.. some sources claim that the scots guns were fired but were fairly ineffectual. Even fully depressed they would have had trouble.. add to that the boggy ground that would have made riccochet and bounce through impossible and you can start to understand why.. then the scots guns were heavy calibre and took much longer to load and fire… The gunners must have been really really strong to quickly site them, probably digging them in to get a shooting angle… No wonder that the English guns tore them up…

Yes, walking a battlefield can be a revelation and what I find difficult to get over is how little the ground is referred to by historians. So much can be just regurgitated from one generation to another but you need to get out in the fresh air and appreciate the third dimension. I had a similar experience at Lewes but of course, if you aren't intimate with the battle your partner just things it's a walk in a paddock.

DO you think Flodden 'Field' is a misnomer? It rather implies rolling easy pastures.

I was lucky enough to be there for the 500th anniversary. Walking the site does put a good perspective on James' handling of the battle. The Scot's guns would also have been the last to move and redeploy. Redeployment would have taken some time for the heavier pieces (much of James'artillery)

I definitely think Flodden Field is a misnomer…. rolling it is.. easy it ain't :-)

I totally agree with all who have responded to this post.. the topography is everything.. Historians must find it difficult as even the most carefully written descriptions don't really bring the field to life.

We will be launching a wargames club at Sandhurst in the next few weeks with a wargames refight of Flodden-to take place after John Sadler (author of the relevant Osprey) has given a talk entitled 'Flodden-Death of an army'.

We (members of the Guildford Wargames Club) will be using 28mm figures and Maximilian! rules. The battlefield will be 8' x 4' and has been ordered from Total System Scenic. Naturally we're using the map in Sadler's Osprey book as our guide..!

That should be cool… I've done it in 10mm – with over 1200 figures on each side – the plan is to use Impetus and am fortunate that my little group has a massive 15 x 4 playing surface. One recommendation I have – get , if you can, copies of the Maps actually produced at the Flodden site itself – there is a really useful battle map and two excellent aproach-march maps for campaign-based scenarios.

General Ism,

Thank you for your kind suggestion. One of the things I learnt while looking at various maps of the battle for this project was that the marshy dip/brook/ditch did not extend along the length of the battlefield, although some maps erroneously show it as doing so.

As Maximilian! has notional figure and ground scales we tried to scale the battlefield and number of figures according to the rules' scale for 25mm figures. I thought our project was quite substantial but I think yours will put our efforts in the shade! Good luck!

Best wishes
Anthony

English Thegn,

It is a massive project and has taken almost a year… I am getting close to the end… I am trying to resist the temptation to purchase a French army.. The Battle of Spurs is calling to me :-)

General Ism,

'The Battle of Spurs is calling to me'-me too! I have already given it some thought and am tempted to do it in 40mm. My collections are either plastic 54mm or plastic 20mm (the 28mm figures we will use in our Flodden game don't belong to me), but I think the Irregular Miniatures 42mm Early Renaissance line will work as the English Army in France would looked far more 'modern' than the army that fought at Flodden. The only problem I might have is finding a suitable early 16th century Tudor-looking longbow figure in that scale.

Anyway, I have already ordered some samples.

English Thegn,

Good for you!!!! I agree entirely about the look and feel of the figures.. fortunately for me, in 10mm a billman, is a billman is a billman… same for the archers really.. yo can get away with it… and to be honest at over 1200 figures, there is no way I can face painting another army from scratch…

One thing I have done with the Scots is to paint up a Bruce and a Comyn unit as the Impetus blocks of pike would do quite nicely for Schilltrom troops… and most of the English will work (with the addition of some heavy horse and a couple of sporadic cross-bow units.. may as well get the maximum use out of the units :-)

General Ism,

You have nicely illustrated one of the major advantages of smaller figures! All the best for your current and future projects.