Fulford Battlefield Research Website

 

Battle of Fulford 1066
 Recording the events of September 1066
tanged arrow from Fulford
yorks releif map

The Fulford Tapestry Website

 

THE SITE OF THE BATTLE OF FULFORD IS DESTINED TO BECOME AN ACCESS ROAD FOR A NEW HOUSING ESTATE UNLESS WE CAN FORCE A POLITICAL AND LEGAL DEBATE ABOUT THE WAY THE PLANNING PROCESSES HAVE IGNORED EVIDENCE AND MISINTERPRETED THE RULES

The aim of this website is to show how the clear evidential basis to locate this 1066 battlesite has been ignored. I want to expose the gravely flawed planning process which has seen the planners, local and national politicians plus English Heritage unite to condemn this exceptional piece of our heritage.

What is so alarming is just how circular the system is: Each of the bodies relies on the other. Even the court has recognised the evidence for the battle is probably right, but the court will not challenge the opinions of the various 'authorities' even though they can be shown to be wrong. This wilful blindness is exactly what has caused a catalogue of recent miscarriages of justice.

  • This is not about a choice between heritage and housing - It would be so easy to have both.
  • And it is not about delays in the planning process - the developers were granted permission in 2007 and only revived the application when it was technically time-expired.
  •  It is not about any recent discovery: The planners and developers knew all about the battlesite before any permissions were granted. They have chosen to suppress and ignore the evidence.
  •  It is about ignoring evidence, failures to investigate, presentation of false evidence, refusals to address errors and ignoring consultation. (Images of A19 flooding)
  •  It is about central as well as local government: The approved access road reaches the main road where it regularly floods. (Late in 2013, DfT gave £1.9million to try and flood-proof the new access road). e.g. Prime Minister, SoS Pickles, Dept of Tpt
  • Our leaders cannot pretend that they were unaware. I wrote to each councillor of York City to ensure that they knew that a piece of irreplaceable heritage was about to be destroyed in their name.
  • It is about the way those with power have ignored their responsibility in a way that I believe is shocking. Letter appealing to the Cabinet Secretary to force ministers to answer questions. Document detailing how the EH 'review' was a farce
  • It is about the shocking and shameful way that those responsible have not only ignored evidence for bats and watervoles but have allowed the destruction of their habitat. Now they have been forced to admit their existence, just watch how they cover their tracks.

So....Whatís the point of politicians? They canít even enforce the law and save a proven battlesite of 1066.

The powerful people who run the planning system will only talk about 'process' and how they have done everything right - Their process cannot turn lies into truth. This is my manifesto - I want the system to deal with the truth and throw out the lies which underpin the application to destroy the site.

If you want to find out about the battle the visit the Fulford battlefield website. This deals with the exciting search for the site where research continues to reveal evidence. There was a dig in July 2014  which has provided a good date for the finds. Please come and see for yourself just in case we loose the battle to save the site from destruction.

My hope is that there can still be an informed public debate which will decide the fate of this irreplaceable piece of our heritage. Three cases are being pursued in the High Court at the time of writing.


This site provides some heavy reading.

It is important that I put the full texts into the public record to support what I am saying.

However there are a number of summary documents, provided during the planning process, which lighten the reading load a little:

  If you are new to the battle, there is a website which tells the story of the battle and the project that discovered it.


Recent Correspondence
  • The arrogance displayed by Persimmon is disgraceful - I am asking them to explain why they have provided, and persisted in presenting, false information to the planning system. But it is hard to get the local press to publish rebuttals of propaganda.
  • Only marginally less arrogant are English Heritage. A document detail how what they told the court in a witness statement was wrong AND the false evidence used was promoted by the other interested parties in my case who are known to oppose recognising Germany Beck as the site of the 1066 battle of Fulford. The head of EH has declined to take any action, trusting that the court will respect their 'authority' and ignore the facts.
  • Document detailing how the EH 'review' was a farce . Notes of their meeting eventually disclosed that the review members recognised the site of the battle had been identified. This is some of what they said
    •          Strong likelihood of site

    •          strong but not incontrovertible

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

    •          We are not saying heís wrong - we are saying he canít prove heís right.

    •          has IDíd potential to suggest possible site

    •          not incorrect just insufficient

    •          probability itís here  - Heís not wrong.

    •          the site concerned has strong claim

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

    •          In accepting the ĎGermany beck remains the most likely candidate for the site of the battle of Fulfordí, the original designation assessment  disagrees significantly with the conclusion of the 2006 public inquiry.

  • I wrote several times to the Prime Minister "The reasons for my intense concern are that the law is being subverted and nobody is taking political responsibility."
  • Several letters to SoS for Communities, Eric Pickles "I will willingly bow to a proper process that addresses the evidence but will not bow down to a process that ignores the facts." also Dept of Transport, Flooding
  • I even wrote in Feb 2015 a letter appealing to the Cabinet Secretary to force ministers to answer questions."I would appreciate your assistance in obtaining answers to the questions I have been addressing to some ministers and a secretary of state. I have been pursuing this matter for over a year and am mindful that the active months of this Parliament are drawing to a close."
  • This document outlines the sequence of events that led to false information being fed into the planning process.
  • Most of the letters are for the planners - the story over the last decade has not changed: Ignored evidence.
  • There are a number of documents that relate to the court actions. "It is quite wrong that EH should rely on the misleading statement of Paula Ware for the designation just as they did in 2005 when the planning application was under consideration. English Heritage should have provided a critical appraisal, or published this misleading information for timely comment before accepting what was reported."

Media contacts

The project has not been successful in raising the public awareness of the battle and the threat to the site. There is an index of press releases that have been sent out to a range of organisations.

Some questions for the planners

For reference:

Fulford tapestry

The 5m tapestry commemorating the battle is now complete

Fulford battlesite flood

This is part of the ditch full of water during one of the floods of 2012. It is possible to estimate the height of the water on the day of the battle as it was a peak tide.  It fits the description of the battle so well. More images of the Fulford battle website

This website was launched in May 2012 and needs lots more work, but if I waited until it was perfect I suspect it would never be launched. So please accept my apologies for errors and omissions. I even hope to convert it to make it web3 compatible soonish.


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

The author of the content is Charles Jones - fulfordthing@gmail.com   Last updated April 2015

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