Monthly Archives: June 2013

Connection to first Caesar landing in Britain

Connection to first Caesar landing in Britain.

Categories: Announcements | Leave a comment

Connection to first Caesar landing in Britain

Unbelievable as it may be I have been sent a link to a little read book that suggests to me that Caesar may have landed at Bulverhythe when the Romans first landed in Britain. The description of the “peninsular fort” exactly fits the fort at Wilting – email from Paul Dengate thank you:

Hi Nick. I’ve been following your writings on the Secrets Of The Norman Invasion for a little while now. Having lived in Hastings all my life, I am interested in its history. Yesterday, I came across this article on the Kent Archaeological Society’s web site entitled On Caesar’s Landing-Place in Britain, by R. C. Hussey, Esq., F.S.A. Although you have mentioned Roman activity in the Bulverhythe area, as far as I am aware you have not mentioned Hussey’s proposal of it as Ceasar’s landing place. So I assume this is new to you and may be of interest. Unfortunately the article provides no evidence and a ‘google’ suggests that Hussey’s idea has not been generally accepted. All the best, Paul Dengate. http://www.facebook.com/l/GAQEnGk9_AQE_uoLvOgAUOGjmW9SjvMTlAPX1xzJ5rjENAQ/www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/Research/Pub/ArchCant/001-1858/07/094-110.htm

This may explain the Roman connections to Wilting and why the Burgh was located there in Alfred the Great’s day. You would have thought historians would have known exactly where Caesar landed but not yet. Its a huge coincidence and I claimed in my evidence to the Public Inquiry in 1997 that there was evidence of a Roman shore fort at Sandrock Field at Wilting. This was never investigated and denied by Dr Gardiner who showed himself to be an expert who did not read the texts of the documents he gave evidence on. The shore fort now needs proper investigation by the authorities as the place Caesar landed has huge tourism potential.

Categories: Announcements | Tags: , , | 1 Comment

Images from Wilting Burghal Fort

These images were taken by Ed Wyatt of the Burghal Fort area at Wilting Farm this week. They show the areas marked in blue spray paint that the archaeologists recognise need hand excavation and clearly this is a very significant find. Right click save as if you want to open in photoshop etc.
SAM_1501.JPG
SAM_1502.JPG
SAM_1503.JPG
SAM_1504.JPG
SAM_1505.JPG
SAM_1506.JPG
SAM_1507.JPG
SAM_1508.JPG
SAM_1510.JPG
SAM_1511.JPG
SAM_1512.JPG
SAM_1513.JPG
SAM_1515.JPG
SAM_1516.JPG
SAM_1517.JPG
SAM_1518.JPG
SAM_1519.JPG
SAM_1520.JPG
SAM_1521.JPG
SAM_1522.JPG
SAM_1523.JPG
SAM_1524.JPG
SAM_1525.JPG
SAM_1526.JPG

Categories: Announcements | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

Video of Burghal Fort of Hastings

This video shows the area where the Hastings Burghal Fort is located being stripped of topsoil as Oxford Archaeology scratch their heads and do nothing to stop this heritage devastation. What is the point of government employing archaeologists to check that heritage is not destroyed if they do nothing when confronted with the evidence. This could never happen in any of the other forts – where is English Heritage and what are our elected representatives doing? Hoping this will go away. It confirms they are doomed and had better understand that failing to stop this now is their only chance of re-election because the truth will now come out and someone has to take the can for this – the responsibility clearly lies with the County Archaeologist to shout stop now.
I have written to Amber Rudd my MP – here is the video
See previous article on why the fort is definitive proof of the Invasion site.

Categories: Announcements | 3 Comments

Discovery of lost Hastings Burgh confirms Norman Invasion site.

A copy of an email was sent to me today which was sent to English Heritage – names withheld:
==========
Regarding the site at Upper Wilting.

There have been various claims that the Upper Wilting site was an important historical military encampment; where William camped prior to the Battle of Hastings. Previous English Heritage (EH) evaluations have cited a lack of documentary or physical evidence in respect of these claims. Consequently, EH have not objected to the development of the site. However, I have recently come across some other documentary and physical evidence relating to the history of the site. I believe these issues warrant proper, qualified consideration before the Upper Wilting site is destroyed.

It has always been assumed the Hastings Burghal Hidage Fort was at the same location as where Hastings Castle was subsequently built (see first – http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/research/projects/burghalhidage/hidage). However, the Burghal Hidage Fort pre-dated the Norman Conquest and was built for very different reasons to Hastings Castle. It could have been elsewhere.

There is little disagreement that the location of Hastings prior to the conquest was vague, and the various local villages and communities were either destroyed or displaced during the conquest. Hastings Castle was built along with the “New Burg” of Hastings, as established by the Normans post 1066 (Ref History of Hastings Castle, Dawson, 1909 and other books concerning the Norman Conquest). The Castle was built to protect the newly formed Norman community and to subjugate the local population. However, the Burghal Hidage Fort system was built to protect southern England from seaborne Viking raiders.

“New” Hastings has never had a port. To this day, the fishing fleet uses the beach. The main pre-conquest port location (for trade) was at Bulverhythe, some distance along the coast (Ref various books, mostly those concerning Roman and Saxon Iron Industry in the Weald). The Upper Wilting site overlooks and tactically commands the Bulverhythe area and Coombe Haven. Furthermore, Upper Wilting is located right on the end of the Roman/Saxon era main London road (at Green Street) and thus provides strategic protection for the region. Hence, the Upper Wilting site provides excellent strategic and tactical protection. Conversely, Hastings Castle is located several miles away, has no view of the Bulverhythe port or related inlet area and is nowhere near the Saxon era main London road. The Hastings Castle site provides no physical protection, whether tactical or strategic, from seaborne raiders.

Hastings Castle was not built (whether built from scratch or re-built from a prior encampment or fortification) until well after the Conquest. During this interval, and even after the castle had been built, soldiers charged with defending the East Sussex coastline resided at Wilting (Ref Fines of Henry IV part II, Edward II part II, History of Hastings Castle, Chronicle of Iolm Harding &etc ). This further suggests Wilting was used as a preferred location from which the local coastline and ports could be protected.

But of greatest significance; I have compared the size of the Upper Wilting site with the size of the Burghal Hidage Fort recorded for Hastings. The size correlates very well. Conversely, the size of the site at Hastings Castle does not correlate at all.

I suspect Upper Wilting is considerably more likely than Hastings Castle to be the site of the Burghal Hidage Fort for the Hastings area. This can easily be confirmed with a straightforward, formal assessment of the Burghal Hidage lists – Saxon era documents. If my assessments were confirmed, it would provide both documentary and physical evidence, all of which is completely independent of the controversy surrounding 1066.

Regardless of theories put forward regarding the Norman Conquest for Upper Wilting; a Burghal Hidage Fort location would be a significant historical site worthy of protection. Contemporary Documentary evidence (pre and post conquest) exists and physical assessment is both straightforward and presently possible.

May I request this possibility urgently be properly assessed before the Upper Wilting site is destroyed in the very near future (I believe the bulldozers start next week).

=============
The significance of this information is the confirmation in the Crowhurst Parish records that the Lord of Crowhurst Manor, who had the family name Pelham, lived at the Burgh where the coastal defense was located at Wilting.

This document supports the understanding that falls into place when the true site is known

This in turn confirms Wilting as the correct pre-conquest location for Hastings, which was recorded and known to be at the same port.

This means the evidence given at the public inquiries (two of them) claiming there was no town, or port, at Wilting or any defenses at Wilting is shown to be completely flawed. The public inquires were prejudiced by false information provided by so called paid experts appearing for the road builders. The road being built through the center of the Old Burgh of Hastings should now be halted until this matter is investigated properly, before any permanent damage is done to the Wilting site.

Wilting is now confirmed by clear and accurate historical record as the site of the Norman Invasion where William the Conqueror is recorded to have camped on the night of the battle. It is part of a much larger site currently claimed to warrant World Heritage Status. This document fills a critical gap in the written record and is conclusive. The Carmen tells us there was a fort at the invasion site which was reinstated when the Normans arrived. We now know that reference was specifically to the Saxon Burghal Hideage Fort at Wilting Manor. Action is required and the minister must intervene before it is too late. A video will be posted later of the damage to the fort site as it stands this afternoon.

Categories: Announcements | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: