Well thats a turn up for the books. English Heritage historian Roy Porter admits to the Guardian “The one place we know the armies weren’t is the low ground below the abbey, where most visitors understandably think the battle must have been fought” The Guardian adds ‘To add to the confusion, the annual recreation by costumed reenactors, which will be fought with increased fervour in October, is held in the wrong place, since the town and abbey ruins occupy the true site.‘
Its a step in the right direction as there is no more evidence in the town or the abbey site than the place we have been told for 940 years was the battlefield. Well done Mr Porter for coming clean on an issue that was getting more and more difficult to deal with in historical and not to mention archaeological terms now we know the truth of the matter. Now lets get the issue sorted properly with a proper investigation of the Manor site in Crowhurst. Lets put behind us the errors of the past since we have suffered the illusion that the so called battlefield was the right site for too long. Perhaps someone from English Heritage might now consider after five years of invitations to come to Crowhurst to look at what is here.
nick at secretsofthenormaninvasion.com
There is no battlefield at Battle Abbey.
English Heritage are promoting the 950th anniversary of the Battle of Hastings this year. New analysis of the Chronicle of Battle Abbey proves beyond doubt that the abbey was not the original battlefield. Those who wish to examine this proof can find the evidence here at this link and I would be pleased to hear from anyone who has any reason to doubt either my view or the expert opinions upon whom I rely.
The evidence of the Chronicle, together with the geophysics in Crowhurst is also supported by the Domesday data analysis which shows conclusively that Crowhurst was the most wasted manor in 1066 where the battle took place. This is followed by the second most wasted manor Wilting where the Normans camped at Wilting Manor. The new evidence in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey now explains in a logical manner why these two manors stand out in the Domesday analysis as the two most wasted manors recorded in the Domesday Book. This conclusive analysis together with the fact no archaeological has ever been found at the Battle abbey site means the site of the battlefield in Crowhurst must now be investigated. Despite five years of information coming out and being sent to media and English Heritage nothing has been done to investigate. English Heritage promised to provide a proper archaeological investigation of the Abbey site when Time Team failed to find evidence of the battle. That was scheduled as a public dig in April but canceled without explanation and since then English Heritage has continued to market its battlefield operation to the public, stepping up the spin as the 950th anniversary of the Battle approaches this October 14th.
The question that must be asked is should a national heritage organisation be spending tens of thousands of pounds on radio and press advertising on a site with no provable provenance because they earn money from the gate. Can it be claimed they can spend this money on advertising but cant afford to do the archaeology that is needed. Any impartial organisation interested in national heritage would investigate the claims made for Crowhurst because they were documented at the time of the invasion. Even now faced with evidence they have known about for some time nothing has been done. The justification to continue marketing operations is made because they seek to rely upon ‘tradition’ as their right to continue to earn gate money from the public. Quite a lot of gate money – its not peanuts. That claim of ‘tradition’ can now be shown not to have any validity and is not even supported by the abbey’s own foundation document.
I cannot see how any organisation can sell the anniversary of such an important date in English history without knowing it is selling access to the real site and with public money when there is no evidence for what they claim. Worse still their claim runs contrary to the documentary evidence.If any other organisation were to conduct itself in such a manner it would be stopped and subjected to court proceedings until the veracity of the claims were proven. It is no longer possible to ignore the evidence presented. English Heritage are not behaving in the manner expected from a national heritage organisation when it comes to the most important date and battlefield site in the world..
14th July 2016
Categories: Announcements, battle abbey, port of Hastings
Tags: 950th year aniversary, 950yrs, battle abbey, battle of hastings, chronicle of battle abbey, domesday book, english heritage, malfosse, norman invasion, second battle of hastings, wilting manor
I have it on very good authority that a national broadcaster has commissioned a one hour special to investigate the claim that the Battle of Hastings battlefield is in the wrong place. I am also told that it will involve active archaeological investigations of the claimed battlefield. The failure of English Heritage to investigate properly the correct site in Crowhurst has been a major concern to the people who have been involved in the archaeological investigations in the Crowhurst Valley I know that. Since this is the only place where any archaeology relating to the Battle of Hastings can be found we can expect to hear more soon. This is good news for those who have fought so hard to get my claims looked at. A verdict delivered on national television, most probably at peak time on a Sunday evening, will deliver the killer blow to the careers of those who have issues those false press releases stating all my claims have been investigated at the previous public inquiries – roll on the Autumn. Can I hear the ghost of 5,000 Englishmen shouting a “hooray” echoing around the Crowhurst Valley? Some things you cannot stop.
Note: I shall not be providing the name of the production company for obvious reasons as I do not want our political friends interfering in the democratic process for their own ends so please don’t ask just speculate.
Tags: acraheology, archaeologists, battle of hastings, combe haven valley, crowhurst manor, east sussex county council, environmentalists, new battle site, norman invasion, second battle of hastings, secrets of the norman invasion, wilting farm
This is a video of the Crowhurst Manor House site where we will shortly be doing a full resistivity survey.
The video can be found at this link http://youtu.be/C6D55o0df58
The manor house may in the course of time be the proof of the battlefield. If we are correct, as the detail in the documents confirm, then William’s camp at Wilting will ultimately be confirmed from the same documents and in particular the Bayeux Tapestry, which can be seen to be recording all the events according to the topography of the valley.
Thank you Phillip for the plane which gives a good perspective of the size of the battlefield plain where we believe the two sides assembled before the battle.
Tags: battle abbey, battle of hastings, combe haven valley, crowhurst manor, east sussex county council, new battle site, Nick Austin, norman invasion, norman invasion site, second battle of hastings, secrets of the norman invasion
The people of East Sussex gave the politicians of East Sussex a wake up call last week by voting out of power those who had brought in the much opposed Link Road. Putting roads across our open countryside and destroying our national heritage will not go unpunished when it come to the time to vote. This was a crucial local issue that stopped the Tories dead in their tracks. The rhetoric of Peter Jones (who really believed his own press) faded into oblivion as he departed the political circus he had created around himself. Now the people have spoken the Tories are out of control of the Council and the Link Road must be stopped.
The Tory press machine told the people that all my heritage site claims in the Crowhurst and Combe Haven Valley had been investigated at the public inquiries. These were lies and if they were not lies I would have been sued. Those claims must be investigated BEFORE the east end of the Link Road is started that crosses the Combe Haven – a Site of Special Scientific Interest.
It is the duty of the new power in East Sussex to impose that due diligence upon the officers who work for them (not the other way round). Privately funded archaeological investigations continue in the Crowhurst valley and if a heritage and environmental disaster are to be avoided they must allow those investigations to come to conclusion this Autumn, before the site of William the Conquerors camp at Upper Wilting Farm is covered in tarmac.
It is the duty of our newly elected representatives to adopt Route S3A – the cheapest route, the route that avoid the Combe Haven and was discussed at the 1997 Public Inquiry when it should have been adopted. Adopting this route is a win win situation. Those who support the environment win, those we who want a road built win, those who want the national heritage of the site of the Battle of Hastings preserved win, those who want to save money win, its a no brainer – wake up everyone, Peter Jones the architect of this folly has gone, lets bury his road with his ego. Lets do it NOW!!
The evidence we are investigating is here
Tags: a259 bypass, battle of hastings, combe haven valley, east sussex county council, environmentalists, link road, new battle site, Nick Austin, norman invasion, second battle of hastings, wilting farm