What of the Ambion connection? In addition to the two Burgundian coins and one possible penny of Edward IV, there are also various medieval buckles and other finds from random survey on the Hill. Given the halo effect discussed above one might suggest that these derive from the medieval hamlet of Ambion, which lay just off the crest of the hill. However the Burgundian and Edward IV coins almost certainly post-date the abandonment of the settlement. It should be remembered that Ambion Hill is where the gold processional cross was also found. This might be supporting evidence for the argument that Ambion Hill was the site of Richard’s camp on the night before the battle and that this was plundered after the battle.

The association of the other Burgundian coin and the groat of Edward IV with the round shot scatter, and the gold ryal and the half groat possibly of Edward IV with the Dadlington windmill finds are both surely significant. The coin with the least convincing association with the battle is the gold ryal of Edward IV, from 1464–70, found near the Plash. When the general area of this find was surveyed on 10 m transects it produced no other finds of significance. Even so, the location is 400 m east of the battlefield, between it and Crown Hill, so it could have been lost by routed troops.

The survey produced only two other gold objects, both finger rings. Neither can be securely dated, with Roman or medieval being possible, yet they too come from significant locations. One was found in the Dadlington windmill group (BOS 4324) and the other from the battlefield core (BOS 4745). Just 400 m west of the latter came the only other finger ring which might be medieval in date, though this is in copper alloy (BOS 4818). The other finger rings are from pre-2005 detecting on Ambion Hill (5 Roman rings) and near Sutton Cheney (1 Roman and 1 possibly post-medieval). This tends to support the argument that the two gold and one copper alloy ring are battle-related objects.

The buckles most often used on armour and horse harness will have been of ferrous metal. Such buckles are not even present in significant number at Towton, despite the recovery there of hundreds of ferrous arrowheads. Instead it is buckles of copper alloy that were found there in very large number. These may be an indicator of action where many individuals of higher status were engaged in hand to hand action. Where few high status individuals were engaged then it may be far more difficult to separate battle-related buckles from the background noise, because in most landscapes copper alloy medieval buckles are common finds. There are 36 from the Bosworth survey, some of which have a broad time-span with others dated to particular centuries. Also from the survey there were 25 strap fittings, which could be medieval but also have parallels outside the period. Several have two integral rivets, which are traditionally identified as a sixteenth- or seventeenth-century feature, but it is uncertain when this style was introduced. Within the collection there are also 10 strap ends.

While the buckles are spread widely across the survey area, the distribution of strap fittings is far from consistent (Figure 6.12). There is a clear grouping from the intensively detected area close to Sutton Cheney, then a handful scattered across the rest of the area, but only one from the intensive detecting on Ambion Hill. In the south-western part of the battlefield core there is a small cluster. This group includes one that is silvered, recovered from the same area as the gilded sword guard fragment, while another which is gilded or tinned comes from a little further to the west. We can argue that the Sutton Cheney group is part of the village halo effect, but no such explanation exists for those on the battlefield. This may indicate an association with the battle but, given the problem of dating, we may even be seeing the superimposition of seventeenth-century items from the cavalry skirmish in 1644, for there are probable early modern spur parts from this same area (Figure 7.2).