Mortimer's Cross

[Jon Freitag]

Last week, Peter Grid based wargaming) joined me in a remote refight of the Battle of Mortimer's Cross.  Peter's account of the battle can be read at the link to his blog.  Before the game, Peter, announced that he would take command of the Yorkist Army (red dice).

The reason given for choosing that army was that the briefing showed the table layout from behind the Yorkist lines.  I clarified that there were cameras behind both army lines, so he did not need to stick to commanding the Yorkists.  Peter remained steadfast and commanded the Yorkist Army in this refight.  The Lancastrian Army carries the blue Combat Effectiveness dice.  The objective is to break two of the three enemy Battles before the enemy can return the favor.


To see how the battle played out from my perspective, please visit Mortimer's Cross II.

[Imperial Dave]

Great report and figures Jon....

Always a pleasure to read

[Jon Freitag]

Thanks, Dave!

[Old Sarum]

Living in Ludlow and after crossing Ludford Bridge (of WotR infamy) I quite often go for walks at Croft Castle and Croft Ambrey hillfort and then drive through Mortimer's Cross on my way home if I need some cheap diesel at Leintwardine.

Inspired by your game, I recently had a closer look around the area. The Lugg valley is really quite wide and flat there – an ideal battlefield. The high ground closes in just to the north at Aymestrey before widening out again up to Wigmore and its now-ruined Mortimer castle.

[Adrian Nayler]

If interested in the battle of Mortimer's Cross one should have a look at the linked historical and archaeological report which considers, amongst other things, the location of the battle:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.battlefieldstrust.com/media/820.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj8nIT2z6aOAxXsQkEAHSJNM4oQFnoECCgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1-y9h1Pva3Es3sidqYHi9I

Though the archaeological outcomes were a statistical disappointment to the researchers (due to methodological difficulties resulting from lack of resources and time), from a historical perspective I found their revision of the widely accepted modern location convincing. The generally accepted location of the battle originates with a singularly passionate advocate of the late 19th century and ran contrary to the previously accepted traditional location in fields just north of Kingsland.

Whichever location you prefer, I found the historical trail fascinating.

[Jon Freitag]

If interested in the battle of Mortimer's Cross one should have a look at the linked historical and archaeological report which considers, amongst other things, the location of the battle:

Whichever location you prefer, I found the historical trail fascinating.

Which location do you prefer?

[Old Sarum]

A couple of pictures of the area. The first was taken from Croft Castle. Mortimer's Cross is off to the right and Leominster off to the left. The Welsh mountains are to the south and the ground is fairly flat for manoeuvring an army.

The second picture was taken recently at Croft Ambrey hillfort. The village of Aymestrey is mid right and Mortimer's Cross is behind the ridge on the left. The hillsides are quite steep and armies would have to keep to the valley bottoms. The Lugg crosses the road at Aymestrey and then flows to the north west.

[Adrian Nayler]

Which location do you prefer?

I was persuaded by the arguments put forward in the report by Foard and Partida.

They prefer the location established by traditional folk memory in the fields north of Kingsland rather than that much later theorized more than a mile further north around Mortimer's Cross. As the authors say on page 5 "recent investigation of both Bosworth and Barnet have shown, there is a tendency for the traditional sites to be forgotten, as original oral history fades, allowing medieval battlefields to migrate across the landscape to new locations over the last two centuries or more."

There is too much to summarise satisfactorily here so one ought to read the report for the details. If I recall correctly, examination of early maps shows a number of 'battle-related' landscape names just north of Kingsland and on the 1754 map a battlefield there is marked as Kingsland Field (though inevitably caution may be required as to the accuracy of this).

For me, a crucial factor was that Edward IV endowed a chantry chapel, dedicated to St. Katherine, in the parish church at Kingsland. The chapel's purpose was for chantry priests to say prayers for the souls of those killed in the battle. The point of such chapels was to be located on or very near a battlefield. It makes most sense for the chantry to be incorporated in the church at Kingsland as it was already established and very close to the battlefield which presumably took place within the parish. An example of a newly-built chantry chapel is that at Barnet built on the battle site where presumably there was no existing suitable building.

I'm not sure that any of this makes that much difference to a wargame 'reconstruction' as either site was likely an 'open field' perhaps with the river Lugg off to one flank. Interesting none-the-less

[Erpingham]

I will, for what it is worth, add my backing to Foard and Partida. Much of the "evidence" for the site around Mortimer's Cross is that bit later and tends to form a "feedback loop" - a location is proposed and "traditional" sites, with appropriate back stories, grow up round it. These then are used as evidence of the location by later writers. Incidentally, if you like battlefield detection stories, this article disappoints archaeologically but is good on early evidence and what derives from what.