Pages

Wednesday, March 6, 2024

Set up for the Battle of Tewkesbury, May 4, 1471

After defeating the Lancastrians (and killing Warwick) at the battle of Barnet, (April 15, 1471), Edward IV had little time to rest or regroup; a fresh landing on England's shores was lead by Quenn Margaret and her son, confusingly also named Edward, the Prince of Wales. King Edward pursued the Lancastrian forces, but they managed to deceive him as to their route. Margaret needed to cross the river Severn to escape (and also rally support in Wales)., but was refused entry into the city of Gloucester, and thus proceeded on the Tewkesbury, where there was a bridge. Before the Lancastrians could effect passage, King Edward and the Yorkists caught up with them, setting the stage for the battle the following morning. 


Hawk's eye view of the Battlefield; near are the Yorkists; in center is Edward IV's battle, with Gloucester's battle ready to move up behind him; to the far right is Hastings battle, , and to the far left is the detachment of 200 "scurriers" hidden in the woods. Opposite are the Lancastrians, with Somerset's flank march hidden by the low ridge, then the figurehead commander, Prince Edward with his small bodyguard, then Wenlocks' battle, and finally that of Devon.  , 


View from the Yorkist right.

View from the Lancastrian left.

Abother view; with my table being a bit larger than the prescribed 6 by 4 feet, I added the river Severn for effect. The enclosed fields have no effect on play in game terms.

View from the opposite side of the field. 



Rules and scenario are by my friends in the UK, Tim Couper and David Knight. 


Additional background from the Osprey, given to me a year or two ago by our book and history loving friends; turned out to be quite prescient!

I plan a test game to refresh myself on the rules;  I will be running this game at HAVOC in Massachusetts the first weekend in April, and probably at Historicon as well. 


22 comments:

  1. That looks like a great setup Peter. I'll look forward to the AAR once you have played this one out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Lawrence. The scenario has a number of interesting features, with plenty of opportunity for surprises!

      Delete
  2. A nice tabletop layout for the game with the Battles ready to engage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Peter! I have to add the dice frames today.

      Delete
  3. Looks great Peter, but you hit the nail on the head, as far as I am concerned, with comments about the queens sons name....far too many Edwards, Henry's and (particularly ) bloody Percy's in WotR....I can never keep track of who is who, and which side they are on!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For sure, keeping track of who's who, and which side they are on (today) can be a real headache. Many nobles of the time lost their head over these issues back in the day.

      Delete
  4. Peter, set-up looks good!
    I have a set of those rules; the plan is to restart my WotR project. I got as far as two Beaufort (Somerset) units, one for Prince Edward an assortment lf Percies and a borderer unit. Tewkesbury was on my mind.....
    Neil

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are very few WotR scenarios that are straightforward slugfests. That's part of what makes the conflict interesting, as well as challenging to model at times!

      Delete
  5. Great set up Peter, a battle I have reenacted for nearly 30 years!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's interesting, Oli. Although the general location of the battle is well know, I take it the exact site of combat is subject to interpretation, and development of the area has hindered sorting things out, eveidently without much help from battlefield archeology.

      Delete
    2. Some of the area has been developed on but other areas have not. The area the Lancastrians retreated through is quite well preserved and gives a good impression of what were described as "foul lanes and deep dykes".

      Delete
    3. Thanks, Oli. That's why I included the hedged areas on that side of the field, even though they won't have any impact on the game.

      Delete
  6. The tabletop set up looks great Peter.
    Nothing beats the WotR for confusion value... all those Edwards etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL, thanks Richard. Confusion seems the order of the day for the WotR!

      Delete
  7. Great looking set up and interesting scenario book, just had a big game of Lion Rampant of Barnet(my local battle) lots of confusion ,treachery and fog!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  8. The set-up looks wonderful. It will be interesting to compare your solo playtest vs later multiplayer versions at conventions, when individual commanders will be able to have a bigger effect!
    Regards, James

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, James. Due to the tactical doctrine of the times, the overall direction of the battle will likely be similar, but the details and outcome can be quite different!

      Delete
  9. Looks good, Peter. I vaguely recall this is the battle that I played in when Tim and Dave hosted a Zoom game during a COVID convention.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It might well be. It's a good choice because the forces are relatively equal, and there are a number of WotR twists (Wenlock's caution, the figurehead Price Edward of Lancaster and King Edward IV of York and the effects of their loss, Somerset's flank march, and the ambush in the woods. I should finally play it out tonight or tomorrow after refreshing myself on the rules last night. I will run it at HAVOC in 3 weeks, and likely at Histroicon as well.

      Delete