A new book has suggested that the field that has been commemorated for hundreds of years as the site of the Battle of Hastings may be a somewhat embarrassing case of mistaken identity. Historian John Grehan has reconsidered the evidence for the circumstances leading up to the battle and believes that it actually took place a mile away from the field that, in spite of a lack of 10,000 bodies or associated artefacts, has been accepted as the battlefield. It’s an interesting story, but needs to be tested by an excavation at the proposed new site. Still, I’m surprised that metal detector enthusiasts haven’t found anything yet if there’s something there to be found – it must be one of the areas where they are most active.
October 28, 2012
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
I run the Independent Historical Research Group in East Sussex and as such IHRG run a separate large group of responsible detectorists to assist in our own projects and to aid other archaeological groups. I would fully agree with the above sentiments however our experience is that single detectorists pursuing their hobby are unlikely to come across any significant evidence unless they are really lucky or unless they are intent on looking for something specific. On the other hand, and by the use of organised detecting,we are able to flood an area and provide a great deal of man hours in a single day with collation of all finds. Only in this way can an area of land be efficiently investigated and such things as a scrap of chain mail or rusty iron arrow head be recognised and properly recorded. It would of course take more than one arrowhead or one piece of chain mail to identify a battle site but at least such record of find would fuel further interest. IHRG would be willing to assist in any such survey and indeed, already have an interest and contacts in the area of Battle. We are contactable at IHRGsussex@aol.com
Comment by Robin Hodgkinson — October 28, 2012 @ 1:31 pm
I run the Independent Historical Research Group in East Sussex and as such we have access to the services of a large team of responsible metal detectorist. IHRG utilise this team in our own projects and manage the use by other archaeological Groups. Whilst I would broadly agree with the above, the comment regarding metal detecting does not hold water in this particular instance. It is our experience that in pursuing this hobby, the average detector user finds something of significance only by luck or by particularly setting out to find a certain item or items, the latter being far between and certainly not the norm. In utilising a team of detector users and organising that team, an area of land can be swamped in a multiple of man hours with all finds being examined and collated. First of all one would have to recognise battlefield artefacts which could well be minute – as in the case of fragments of chain mail if the ground conditions allowed them to survive. Such objects as iron arrow heads could be evidence if found in abundance however most detector users avoid iron unless specifically looking for something made of that material which again is not the norm. The way round this is through organised detecting surveys where the participants know what they are seeking and where all finds can be examined and identified. IHRG run and manage such surveys to good effect and such services are available free of charge for non commercial archaeology by contacting IHRGsussex@aol.com
Comment by robin hodgkinson — October 29, 2012 @ 12:26 am