Fulford battlefied under threat

July 2015 dig

The Fulford Tapestry

Inconcistency?

Summary of published report

Visiting the site

Home
Up
Deignation images
Designation Guide
Inconcistency?
EH brieifing paper
Critique of EH errors
Contemporary notes

NEW

Images of flood on the day of the battle

12 panoramas of the battle site

YouTube videos

The Fulford Tapestry

All History Guide: Your guide to history on the Internet..

Finding Fulford cover

Kindle version

" .. this unusual, and yes, excellent history book.." 

"More books like this one introducing historical study in a sympathetic was are needed.."

Now in paperback

... and into its 3rd reprint!

 

Shortly before Christmas 2014, and just days after rejecting my appeal for English Heritage to disclose information that I had told them I knew existed, a trickle of new documents began.

I have just received a document sent to their 'non-review' committee in March 2013 setting out what the response of EH would be. They finally published this as the DRC's conclusion at the end of July 2013.

There is a pattern in EH's behaviour: You may recall that EH told their Battlefields Panel in Feb 2012 that they did not intend to designate the site because of the planning situation. But the expert Panel, unlike the eminent Review Committee, stood up to EH.

Quite how the predetermined conclusion can be reconciled with what members of the Review Committee said, according to notes very recently disclosed by EH, I intend to investigate.

This is what the committee members are quoted as saying:

1 The pro recognition comments

·         Strong likelihood of site

·         strong but not incontrovertible

·         Makes location inherently fit - as agreed by other (members)

·         We are not saying he’s wrong - we are saying he can’t prove he’s right.

·         has ID’d potential to suggest possible site

·         not incorrect just insufficient

·         probability it’s here  - He’s not wrong.

·         the site concerned has strong claim

·         Pay tribute to Chas J               -interesting material-case not yet clinched

·         In accepting the ‘Germany beck remains the most likely candidate for the site of the battle of Fulford’, the original designation assessment  disagrees significantly with the conclusion of the 2006 public inquiry.

2 The many calls for extra work

·         Recommend further investigation - how?

·         mitigation strategy desirable.

·         Ideally we’d wait for more investigation

·         Notes BFP [Battlefield Panel] support for more effective mitigation strategies

·         Ask for more xxx xxxxxx before dismissing …

·         Real need for more methodological exploration

·         Protect as an archaeological ‘site under AMAAAA’ 79 an Archaeological Area?

·         this reinforces the issue of further mitigation that we would expect to see during the planning process

 

Related sites Facebook  Twitter (@ helpsavefulford)        Visiting Fulford        Map York

There is a site devoted to saving the battlesite: The site has the story of the process that has allowed the site to be designated an access road to a Green Belt, floodplain housing estate.

And another website for the Fulford Tapestry that tells the story of the September 1066: This tells the story embroidered into the panels.

The author of the content is Chas Jones - fulfordthing@gmail.com  last updated June 2015

this site does not use any cookies - so nothing is knowingly installed on your computer when browsing