Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
Battle of Towton
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by FowPah (U1746998) on Wednesday, 29th September 2010
Why is this battle so little known in this country?
-
Message 2
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 30th September 2010
That very question has been discussed at least once here, I recall.
The reason it has sunk into oblivion, at least for the majority, appears to be linked to a now rather ancient tendency in historical terms to romanticise the war in which that battle played such a pivotal role.
Two points of view exist which supports this historical tendency. One more recent view is that the entire war is something of a fiction and more accurately described as a series of events whose development and motives governing their protagonists is actually not best explained as an anatgonism between L and Y.
A more traditional view says that Henry Tudor's propaganda machine, for want of a better term, did much to exaggerate the importance and indeed the bloodiness of the whole struggle in which Towton played a part, in order to lend credence to his stated ambition of "reconciliation" upon taking the crown.
Upon achieving its aim however the propaganda itself would most likely have been regarded as something of a potential embarassment given that this approach generated much by way of half truth and falsehood. It was therefore rather an establishment position afterwards not to "buck the state line" by examining the period inquisitively and instead stick to the more romantic flower-strewn version popularised under Tudor encouragement. Lies became lore became history.
Either way the upshot was that significant events were forgotten or misrepresented in English history, Towton being a rather good example of the former at least in the minds of the general public. Given that one in every hundred of the then English population could have well died in that battle it is a notable example of the power of propaganda in any period when wielded by the state, I'd say. -
Message 3
Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Thursday, 30th September 2010
I think it had alot to do with Tudor propaganda and self-promotion?
But as material for a film, brilliant! A ten hour bloodbath fought in a blinding snow blizzard? And no prisoners, leading to battlefield mutilations and executions? -
Message 4
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 30th September 2010
Archaeologically Towton is important because of the skeletons of the participants that have been found and studied.
If you don't know the work consult 'Blood Red Roses: The Archaeology of a Mass Grave from the Battle of Towton, AD 1461'.
TP -
Message 5
Posted by Spruggles (U13892773) on Friday, 1st October 2010
Why isn't better known? Because real history isn't taught in schools anymore. I endorse TwinProbe recommendation. Very good book!
-
Message 6
Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Friday, 1st October 2010
There was an excellent episode called 'Blood Red Roses' in the unreleased(?) series "Secrets of the Dead" from a decade ago, about the mutilated skeletons found there in 1996.
The TV episode;
The Book;
-
Message 7
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 2nd October 2010
Sat, 02 Oct 2010 18:00 GMT, in reply to Man_Upstairs in message 6
Towton was very handy for when I was studying medical provision in medieval warfare at university!
To be honest, I don't think people in general know very much about the Wars of the Roses at all; I'd guess that Bosworth is probably the only battle most would know the name of, if any. Bits and pieces about Wicked Uncle Richard and the Princes in the Tower might surface, and possibly there might be assumptions about the rivalry between Yorkshire and Lancashire. I don't know - perhaps I'm being too harsh. -
Message 8
Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Sunday, 3rd October 2010
Hi A-N, what are the original sources for the WotR?
Polydore Virgil? -
Message 9
Posted by LairigGhru (U14051689) on Thursday, 25th November 2010
I saw something on TV a week or so ago and it was describing recent exciting archaeological finds made on the Towton battlefield.
In the area where the Lancastrian forces stood, two fragments of a hand-held cannon (i.e. an early pistol) have been found. They both clearly come from a weapon that exploded in the firer's hands - a disaster that must have killed not only him but some of the men standing near him. Moreover, the fragments come from two different weapons so we have proof that more than one was being used in this battle. Historians knew from the records that these weapons had been present but this is the first direct proof.
The metal used was of poor quality and it is this that is reckoned to have caused the tragedies. -
Message 10
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Thursday, 25th November 2010
Intriguing. It would appear that this is actually the first time medieval firearms have been found on a battlefield:
I think the comments about changing our understanding of medieval warfare is overstating the case. We already knew handgunners were used in the field (as opposed to in sieges) from documentary accounts - they are recorded at Barnet and Tewksbury as well, for example - they've just never been found before. Edward IV reportedly had 500 Flemish handgunners when he marched into London; that's an impressive 8-10% of his army. -
Message 11
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Thursday, 25th November 2010
Intriguing. It would appear that this is actually the first time medieval firearms have been found on a battlefield:
I think the comments about changing our understanding of medieval warfare is overstating the case. We already knew handgunners were used in the field (as opposed to in sieges) from documentary accounts - they are recorded at Barnet and Tewksbury as well, for example - they've just never been found before. Edward IV reportedly had 500 Flemish handgunners when he marched into London in April 1471; that's an impressive 8-10% of his army. -
Message 12
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Saturday, 27th November 2010
Not so much a pistol, "being the most powerful hand gun in the world...", as a hand-controlled cannon or either mounted on a rest or tucked under the arm like a grenade launcher, which I suppose is what it was, really.
-
Message 13
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 27th November 2010
a hand-controlled cannon or either mounted on a rest or tucked under the arm like a grenade launcher, which I suppose is what it was, reallyΒ
By the 1460s arquebuses had been developed which were not so very different from later matchlock muskets. About this time there was a transition from large bore guns (20-25mm) to weapons firing bullets only 12-15mm in diametre, roughly the same as an 18th century musket. -
Message 14
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Sunday, 28th November 2010
βI had previously found a lead cannonball which is from a handgun or a very small mounted gun" (from the local press report)-
Would those have been the 20- 25 mm rounds that you mentioned.
How did they refer to these weapons at the time. Was 'arquebus'/ 'hackbut' etc etc, originally a 15th century term?
At the other end of the scale, some years back I was at Algericas where works just outside the town walls in the C14th Marindid barbacana had revealed an array of neatly serried stone balls ranged like solitaire pieces but the size of footballs or bigger. I assumed they must have been for non-gunpowder engines since Algeciras fell to the Castilians in 1342 and gunpowder weapons although being used as defensive weapons were very crude at that time. Could bombards of that time have fired rounds that big? -
Message 15
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Sunday, 28th November 2010
Sean McLachlan, in 'Medieval Handgonnes', states that:
This signature feature [i.e. the hook under the barrel] gave this type of handgonne the name hackbut, (also known as HakenbΓΌchse, or haquebut), referring to the hook. The French term, arquebus, eventually became the most favoured.Β
Unfortunately he doesn't cite original sources, though does also list couleuvrine Γ main, pistola, schiopetto, tyufyak and even bombardelle (the latter usually used for light cannon but also occasionally for handguns).
According to David Nicolle ('Guns in Medieval Europe'), in 1386 Southampton had almost 60 large-bore cannon, of which that biggest had a calibre of more that 50cms. So yes, the stone balls you saw could well have been gunstones. -
Message 16
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Sunday, 28th November 2010
So I guess 'handgonne' would have been the term used this side the Channel on a snowy day in Yorkshire when the Continent was cut off by fogge.
Thinking of those stone projectiles- Were the most primitive bombards large bore (ca.1340) and was it as casting techniques, etc. became more sophisticated that they were able to make smaller and lighter cannon? -
Message 17
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Sunday, 28th November 2010
They seem to have started off small. The earliest guns - in Europe at least - fired large arrows rather than more conventional shot. It's probably once they were convinced of the success of these early experiments and their manufacturing techniques, and roundshot had been developed, that they felt able to try larger weapons.
-
Message 18
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Sunday, 28th November 2010
Is it true that Ferdinand of Aragon hired a French master gunner who introduced iron shot,making his siege artillery much more effective in the war with Granada- ( mind you, it still took him 10 years to reduce the kingdom to surrender).
-
Message 19
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Wednesday, 21st December 2011
Why is this battle so little known in this country?Β
Maybe because it is an episode in deep English history. In other words it is not just pre-1707, nor is it just pre-1603 but it is also pre-1485. This makes it triply unfashionable in the minds of the UK establishment.
For the UK establishment the phrase 'this country' always refers to 'Britain'. It doesn't refer to England.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ iD
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ links
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.