Rehabilitation of "The Chronicle of Battle Abbey"
From my reading of John Grehan's book "1066 - An Uncomfortable Truth" I developed an antipathy for the Chronicle and being exposed to Nick Austin's work just made it worse. However, since I've obtained a translation of it, my distrust has lessened to the point where I shall spend some time to try to weave it into the fabric of the timeline of that fateful day.
As with all 12th cent. sources things have been mis-remembered, forgotten and twisted. The Chronicle makes no mention of any skirmish but starts off with the main battle and closes with the Malfosse incident. But the Chronicle only makes sense to me if there was a skirmish.
Description of Sites
Let's look at the location of Battle Abbey.
It stands on top of a ridge that dominates the landscape and no doubt could be seen for miles around although its view north would have been limited. Some commentators cite a lack of water at Battle Abbey and yes getting water to the Abbey must have been a logistical nightmare but solved somehow.
Now listen to what the Monks surveying the battlefield said about the site.
1. "They studied the battlefield and decided that it seemed hardly suitable for so outstanding a building"
2. "... on a hill, and so dry of soil, and quite without springs, and that for so great a construction a more likely place nearby should be substituted"
3. " they gave as their reason the lack of water"
4. Again they complained of the unsuitability of the site, this time because for some distance round the ground was heavily wooded and therefore stone fit for building could not be found."
This last sentence is crucial to our understanding as to where the battle took place. Both Battle Abbey, (the Time Team site at the mini-roundabout) and Caldbec Hill are described as being on the edge of the Andresweald whereas the battlefield is surrounded by woods. As Crowhurst is even further south, it also eliminates Nick Austin's choice of battlefield.
Now let's consider Ashes Wood.
1. For me, the monks seem to be saying that if a splendent building was placed on the battlefield, it wouldn't stand out in the landscape. Indeed, the land slopes down from Wadhurst Lane to Ashes Wood and any building would be partially hidden. So, I consider my choice of battle site meets this criterium.
2. Is Ashes Wood on a hill? Yes, the ground rises from the bottom of Netherfield Hill near to the junction with the A2100 to the junction of Wadhurst Lane at approx 117 metres asl and then falls away slightly to about 104 metres just before the ridge inside Ashes Wood. Again, the site meets the criterium
3. There doesn't seem to be any streams nearby. 3 out of 3.
4. Heavily wooded. If Caldbec Hill to the south is considered to be on the edge of the forest then Ashes Wood would have been one part of a much larger forest.
So, my choice of battlefield ticks all the boxes according to the monks surveying the actual battle site.
Is Battle Abbey in the wrong place then?
Both yes and no.
In the Chronicle we have the following "... chose a fit place ... a site located not far off, but somewhat lower down, towards the western slope of the ridge. ... This place, still called Herste, has a low wall as a mark of this".
In my opinion, if the English Heritage site was the battle location then Nick Austin's Crowhurst site comes into view as it is on the western side of the Ridge, which runs from the Station Approach in Battle to the castle on West Hill in Hastings.
However, if I'm correct then Battle Abbey's location is the compromise location. This is because it is lower down from the battlefield at Ashes Wood ( 83 metres above sea level as opposed to 104 metres for Ashes Wood) and more importantly "towards" the Ridge.i.e. closer to the Ridge than the true battlefield.
Now we have to contend with "he refused angrily and ordered them to lay the foundations of the church speedily and on the very spot where his enemy had fallen and the victory won". This sentence is used to "prove" that Battle Abbey is in the "right" spot but what do the monks write at the start of the next paragraph? "...and they prudently erected the High Altar as the king commanded, on the very place where Harold's emblem, which they call a 'standard, was seen to have fallen". So now we have a different marker in place for Harold. Not his body but Harold's Standard.
Eleanor Searle in her introduction ( page 15) highlights the fact that only saints resting places are placed under a High Altar not ones enemy. And consider the first time William's vow is recorded on page 37 "I make a vow that on this very battlefield I shall found a monastery for the salvation of all, ..." No mention of the place where Harold will fall at all. Only later do the monks record, on page 45, that the place of Harold's death had to be taken into account. I think there is a case of "mission creep" coming into play.
However, I think the monks won the argument by saying that if sir remembers, he bested Harold's best troops in a skirmish nearby the compromise location and therefore set up his victory over Harold in the morning and thus should mark that location.
So, there you go then. A deep dive into the text of the Chronicle reveals some excellent location details which excludes any site south of mine.
