ANGLO SAXON CHRONICLES

This text is from Peterborough Chronicle (also called the Laud manuscript and the E manuscript) is a version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles originally maintained by the monks of Peterborough Abbey, now in Cambridgeshire. It contains unique information about the history of England and of the English language after the Norman Conquest. However the Saxon Chronicles also confirm that William landed in the area of ‘Pevensey’ as it was understood then. In conclusion it cannot be used by those who do not follow Norman text to mean the town of Pevensey, which was on the opposite side of the Bay and a days march from the town where the castle had been built by the Romans a thousand years before. It is a common mistake perpetrated by those who have no knowledge of the Battle of Hastings and the territory in which it was fought. This was known to Saxons as the Hastings Hundred but to Normans, who where French knew Hastings as under the Lordship of Pevensey. Normans named areas of France by the town whose Lord owned the territory hence the Bayeux Tapestry does not say that the French fleet left from St Valery when in fact it is well recorded elsewhere.  

The Saxon Chronicle also confirms that William had ‘built a castle at the port of Hastings’. Many historians have forgotten that it was the Count of Eu who built the castle after the Battle of Hastings. The castle built by William was wooden, as shown being built in the Bayeux Tapestry. Two castles were built one at the bottom of the hill by the port and one at the top behind a baracade. The Port of Hastings was situated on the Combe Haven valley next to it, three miles from the new port of Hastings, where the mint was built in the time of Alfred. Consequently those who call themselves historians have recently made up excuses by stating that there is no evidence of the port built by William when he landed in 1066. A much repeated accusation made against my evidence presented at the Public Inquiry in 1987. The experts sought to use the castle built in stone on the cliffs overlooking Hastings town as the original hasting castle, completely unaware of the Saxon history of the town, making a mockery of academic studies of the area. Any man or web site who names Hastings castle, built in 1095 by William the Conqueror or the Count of Eu, as the castle of the Norman Invasion, is distorting history and in league with those who do not care what you have learnt from historical study. It is a easy way to confound the fakers by confirming the date of when Hastings castle was built. Once you have grasped this knowledge you will know that everything on this web site is correct and everything on the fakers web sites is there to stop you getting to the truth of the matter. It is the identity of where the Normans camped on the night before the battle and fought as shown in the Bayeux Tapestry.

You might think this does not matter, but the people who have perpetrated this myth have spent 200 million pounds so far as a result of these lies, and lies they are, building a road. Indeed they have blamed everyone else and believe they have got away with it, supported by Heritage England who run both Battle Abbey and Pevensey Castles.

This nonesense can be confirmed in the area of the Combe Haven, where the name of the landing site can be found at Bulverhythe at the entrance to the Combe Have Valley.  Bul-wara-Hythe is the name meaning ‘Landing Place of the People’ in Olde English. William ordered a chapel to be built there to commemorate their landing and it can still be found on the island at Glynne Gap. Dispensation was granted by the Pope St Nicholas for pilgrims who subsequently travelled there.

The Saxon Chronicles tells us little, but what it does tell us is accurate. This includes the name ‘Appledore’ as the place in which the two sides fought. Many have tried to reconcile this against what is known. It is known that the first name that was known to be used was the ‘Battle of the Hoar Apple tree’ (after Appledore), because the Battle of Hastings only materialised later when the Abbey was built (1095). It was recognised that an old tree, which was ancient was situated on the site where the blood of the English aristocracy was spilt. Past web sites in Battle have sought to prove a connection to Battle but have proven this connection to be false. However a 2,000 year old yew tree exists next to the Crowhurst Abbey and Manor site. It is believed this same tree also features in  the Bayeux Tapestry, when King Harold sees the Normans appear over a ridge. This tree is a defining element that identifies Crowhurst because the tree existed then and exists today in the church yard of Crowhurst Church. That church was built three hundred years after the Battle of Hastings and many of the identifiable features of the landscape are connected to that place unchanged from the time of the Battle. The Saxons understood that it was ok to call any tree an apple tree when it bloomed in the Autumn (Google it for confirmation).

Originaly there were eight manuscripts which supported the Crowhurst and Hastings sites near Bulverhythe. Over time these have grown to thirteen or fourteen depending upon how you count them. We must not forget that almost every historian has written about the Battle of Hastings, because it features in the story of what makes the British a soverign nation. Favour fell upon the vanquished because of the courage shown by all who fell, even after Harold and his men had died. It is indeed strange that so many Englishmen now are found to be fascinated by the depths of the case against the Church who made up the story about Battle Abbey. Perhaps past lives are somehow integrated into the ones we now find ourselves in. However the errors of the day were written down when the Chronicle of Battle Abbey was written shortly after the battle. It showed that it is not possible to lie in the name of God and escape the retribution that will fall upon those responsible, either in that life or the next, which is yet to come.

‘These two general battles (Stamford Bridge and Battle of Hastings) were fought within five nights. Meantime Earl William came up from Normandy into Pevensey on the eve of St. Michael's mass; and soon after his landing was effected, they constructed a castle at the port of Hastings. This was then told to King Harold; and he gathered a large force, and came to meet him at the estuary of Appledore. William, however, came against him unawares, ere his army was collected; but the king, nevertheless, very hardly encountered him with the men that would support him: and there was a great slaughter made on either side. There was slain King Harold, and Leofwin his brother, and Earl Girth his brother, with many good men: and the Frenchmen gained the field of battle, as God granted them for the sins of the nation. Archbishop Aldred and the corporation of London were then desirous of having child Edgar to king, as he was quite natural to them; and Edwin and Morkar promised them that they would fight with them.’