Looked to me like there was evidence of burning present, along with possibly charcoal? If so, then a good radio carbon date ought to be obtainable. First step - get some reliable dating. Second step - start talking. Jumping the gun will devalue your hypothesis. I _SO_ agree that the Battle Abbey site is totally wrong - but we need solid proof and that's what we are hoping for from you.
I'm and thousands of others are still waiting the results of Crowhurst...... Can you tell us did you manage to get a diggernn to get through the clay and were there remains undrneath. what were the barrows what did the radar say.. I wish you'd let us know !!!!!!
@day jee Apologies for perhaps coming over as a bit pedantic. I had a rather strict English teacher whom used to chew your arse if you dared to make basic errors..........it's the best part of 50 years ago now, but the memory is still quite vivid. And I'm awaiting with great interest the findings of the survey on those suspected grave mounds. I have registered on the SOTNI Facebook page, but I couldn't find any new information. I'm about halfway into Nick Austins book, and reading it certainly makes you want to know more.......
Whenever I hear Neil talking it takes me back to the days of my high school History classes and our teacher, Mr. Wicken, who was from London. Neil, you share his passion for history and I congratulate you on inspiring people! Keep up the good work all of you!
the bottom layer looks like ordinary sandstone which has some iron staining. The sandstone has natural jointing that crumbles into flat sections. there's probably a buried soil or paleosol on top of the fractured layered sandstone and above that it looks like loess or loam accumulation. My assessment is it is an ordinary hole.
Exactly what I would find in my garden not 5 miles away, top soil, clay ,sandstone fragments even sand before I get to the sandstone bedrock about 3ft down
Have you considered that when the ground was leveled to build the foundations for the electrical transmission line. Maybe the ground had to be bulldozed to accommodate the pylons ! That would account for the difference of height between the two fields.Just saying.
When I was a kid in the early 70's we went on a Scout camping trip to somewhere I think on the Downs but certainly in that area & very close to the sea. I swear what follows is true or at least I *100%* thought it was. At night as I lay effectively in the grass you could hear the crashing of hundreds of horse's hoofs through the ground. I don't know what caused this or even if it was real but it happened on a few nights. I'm not a "spiritual" person & in fact an atheist but I've got an open mind to what we may currently consider paranormal. Knowing how famous events & people often come up in ghost stories it just intrigues me that this could have been the noise of the battle. They reckon even today, in the Marianas Trench, that you can still hear noise from the naval battles of *World War II* as, owing to the conditions down there, the sound has been continually trapped between the deep sea canyons!
Great Britain never really left the Imperial system, we still drink pints of beer and travel at miles per hour and measure the distances we travel in miles. We also measure our weight in stones and Ibs and our height in feet and inches.
Hello mate, happy to see a fellow man interested in the battle of hastings! I'd like to see if anyone in the future, 2 years possibly, if interested in going to hastings to investigate! Reply with your social media :)
@@tahnx47 Hi My interest is more in the ancient world and British pre-history. The medieval period has been of secondary interest despite the fact I was born on the battlefield of Barnet. The Battle of Hastings was always a little bit too iconic for me as I assumed that everything about it was known, but as my sources tell me that it was not fought where it is supposed to have been, and your argument verifies this then my interest is peaked. I would definitely be interested in bringing my skills to bare on the subject and if possible, verifying my findings. I tend not to do much social media but I do have Facebook.
An ancient circular feature buried under a field surely does not have to be Saxon. It could be far older than that. I find this video unconvincing to say the least.
Those flat ‘cut’ stones look like flooring, could there have been a highest status building there are is the proposition that there were defensive constructions. If the defending Saxons had the amount of time to prepare that is inferred., it must be possible that anti-cavalry defences would surely have been prepared, walls, some sort of small redoubts, disguised trenches across the lines of approach etc. Harold, as is well recounted, fought with William during his time in Normandy as his”Guest” so knew the strengths of the heavy cavalry against foot infantry and would be sure to want to turn this Norman advantage into disadvantage. That’s the problem with much first millennia English history, the blighters in the post-Roman era up to the later Mediaeval didn’t follow the example of the Romans and keep masses of written records or if they did, they are lost. The Anglo Saxon Chronicles are as reliable as today’s UK Media, maybe more reliable than the BBC though eh?
From what I understand of the military tactics from your dormfotos and googlemaps the Saxons fort an textbook defensive fight as its learn even to day. Canalicing terrain, faiting in an inklain. prepared defensing lines, theprivnng the opponent of his strangs. They must have som forewarning and time to perper the urfworks. Tactist Im told is time and geografiks. You may want to contact som athorathy from Sandhurst take a look at the bathelgrundgeografiks because I think the saxons, according to the textbook who'd have won. So explain the outcome of the beattel is not explained. Howe can the saxons loos? They seems to have every thing to they envartys. As an commander I whod have ben very optemamistisk.
William had his Norman cavalry to use against the weary Saxons. Harold had previously been very well-prepared to defend against the invasion, but those preparations had been thrown out the window when he was forced to dash off to York to defend against the Viking attacks.
What was the point of this? Did your job as a historian but you need qualified archeologists. And who is producing these useless videos. Absolutely painful to watch. Artifacts aren’t going to be a meter underground.
Looked to me like there was evidence of burning present, along with possibly charcoal? If so, then a good radio carbon date ought to be obtainable. First step - get some reliable dating. Second step - start talking. Jumping the gun will devalue your hypothesis. I _SO_ agree that the Battle Abbey site is totally wrong - but we need solid proof and that's what we are hoping for from you.
I'm and thousands of others are still waiting the results of Crowhurst...... Can you tell us did you manage to get a diggernn to get through the clay and were there remains undrneath. what were the barrows what did the radar say.. I wish you'd let us know !!!!!!
@day jee They're bodies not body's
@day jee Apologies for perhaps coming over as a bit pedantic. I had a rather strict English teacher whom used to chew your arse if you dared to make basic errors..........it's the best part of 50 years ago now, but the memory is still quite vivid. And I'm awaiting with great interest the findings of the survey on those suspected grave mounds. I have registered on the SOTNI Facebook page, but I couldn't find any new information. I'm about halfway into Nick Austins book, and reading it certainly makes you want to know more.......
@day jee Sounds like you've got a lot of local knowledge? Love ya spelling mistakes and humour.
Whenever I hear Neil talking it takes me back to the days of my high school History classes and our teacher, Mr. Wicken, who was from London. Neil, you share his passion for history and I congratulate you on inspiring people! Keep up the good work all of you!
the bottom layer looks like ordinary sandstone which has some iron staining. The sandstone has natural jointing that crumbles into flat sections. there's probably a buried soil or paleosol on top of the fractured layered sandstone and above that it looks like loess or loam accumulation. My assessment is it is an ordinary hole.
Exactly what I would find in my garden not 5 miles away, top soil, clay ,sandstone fragments even sand before I get to the sandstone bedrock about 3ft down
Have you considered that when the ground was leveled to build the foundations for the electrical transmission line. Maybe the ground had to be bulldozed to accommodate the pylons ! That would account for the difference of height between the two fields.Just saying.
When I was a kid in the early 70's we went on a Scout camping trip to somewhere I think on the Downs but certainly in that area & very close to the sea.
I swear what follows is true or at least I *100%* thought it was. At night as I lay effectively in the grass you could hear the crashing of hundreds of horse's hoofs through the ground.
I don't know what caused this or even if it was real but it happened on a few nights.
I'm not a "spiritual" person & in fact an atheist but I've got an open mind to what we may currently consider paranormal.
Knowing how famous events & people often come up in ghost stories it just intrigues me that this could have been the noise of the battle.
They reckon even today, in the Marianas Trench, that you can still hear noise from the naval battles of *World War II* as, owing to the conditions down there, the sound has been continually trapped between the deep sea canyons!
Will Great Britain soon return to Imperial Measurement System? You put forth a very good hypothesis to actual site being in Crowhurst.
Great Britain never really left the Imperial system, we still drink pints of beer and travel at miles per hour and measure the distances we travel in miles. We also measure our weight in stones and Ibs and our height in feet and inches.
Class love this show
Could that layer of sand at 3.11 have anything to do with
the piece of broken rusting pipe next to it?
Hello mate, happy to see a fellow man interested in the battle of hastings! I'd like to see if anyone in the future, 2 years possibly, if interested in going to hastings to investigate! Reply with your social media :)
@@tahnx47 Hi
My interest is more in the ancient world and British pre-history. The medieval period has been of secondary interest despite the fact I was born on the battlefield of Barnet.
The Battle of Hastings was always a little bit too iconic for me as I assumed that everything about it was known, but as my sources tell me that it was not fought where it is supposed to have been, and your argument verifies this then my interest is peaked.
I would definitely be interested in bringing my skills to bare on the subject and if possible, verifying my findings.
I tend not to do much social media but I do have Facebook.
@@vespelian5274 great, what's your facebook
@@tahnx47 Charles Devus
lol thats not a rusty pipe, its a broken stone
An ancient circular feature buried under a field surely does not have to be Saxon. It could be far older than that. I find this video unconvincing to say the least.
the level of archaeology skills on show here is very impressive!!!! lol
Great video. Thank you.
Tile kiln?
Would a powered washer with directed head be of beneficial use in revealing more and better the now submerged defences ¿?
Round houses?
Very interesting
Hold the camera steady and I might watch it
You said it at minute 6:16. "Inconclusive."
Yep!
Congratulations.
You found a hole.
That IS definately pottery.......
The stone looks like the sandstone at the eastern end of Hastings By the caves Just throwing it out there
Those flat ‘cut’ stones look like flooring, could there have been a highest status building there are is the proposition that there were defensive constructions.
If the defending Saxons had the amount of time to prepare that is inferred., it must be possible that anti-cavalry defences would surely have been prepared, walls, some sort of small redoubts, disguised trenches across the lines of approach etc.
Harold, as is well recounted, fought with William during his time in Normandy as his”Guest” so knew the strengths of the heavy cavalry against foot infantry and would be sure to want to turn this Norman advantage into disadvantage.
That’s the problem with much first millennia English history, the blighters in the post-Roman era up to the later Mediaeval didn’t follow the example of the Romans and keep masses of written records or if they did, they are lost. The Anglo Saxon Chronicles are as reliable as today’s UK Media, maybe more reliable than the BBC though eh?
From what I understand of the military tactics from your dormfotos and googlemaps the Saxons fort an textbook defensive fight as its learn even to day. Canalicing terrain, faiting in an inklain. prepared defensing lines, theprivnng the opponent of his strangs. They must have som forewarning and time to perper the urfworks. Tactist Im told is time and geografiks. You may want to contact som athorathy from Sandhurst take a look at the bathelgrundgeografiks because I think the saxons, according to the textbook who'd have won. So explain the outcome of the beattel is not explained. Howe can the saxons loos? They seems to have every thing to they envartys. As an commander I whod have ben very optemamistisk.
William had his Norman cavalry to use against the weary Saxons. Harold had previously been very well-prepared to defend against the invasion, but those preparations had been thrown out the window when he was forced to dash off to York to defend against the Viking attacks.
I'm sorry...what??
get someone in who knows how to dig.
What was the point of this? Did your job as a historian but you need qualified archeologists. And who is producing these useless videos. Absolutely painful to watch. Artifacts aren’t going to be a meter underground.