CUCKNEY and the Battle of Hatfield

Frustratingly little is known about the Battle of Hatfield. The 1st writings about the battle were by Bede in c .731 AD – 99 years after the event.

It probably took place on the 12th October 632AD at a place called, “Haethfelth”, which merely means heath field (unattended land overgrown with heather and gorse with acidic soils, of low fertility, and often sandy and very free-draining), also referred to as Hatfield.

“Cukeney upon Hattefeild” is mentioned in the Domesday Book (1086) and certainly has those characteristics.

In an age of dense forestation (that lasted right up to the early 19th Century) the open land afforded by heath would represent an ideal clearing for a large conflict.

The Hatfield near Cuckney is the only one supported by any possible evidence, as over 200 bodies were discovered under St. Mary’s Church, Cuckney in 1951 during N.C.B. operations , ministered by the contractors, Eastwoods. Local historian, Captain Peters’ opinion was that this could rise to as many as 800.

With Bassetlaw representing the fringes of Edwin’s influence, it may also be that he would have been unable to call on the support of many local people. Furthermore, the area around Cuckney at least, with it’s poor soil and marshy land, was known to be sparsely populated.

The issue of who chose the battle site is unclear. According to the writings of Geoffrey of Monmouth, Cadwallon was marching from Exeter with 10,000 soldiers loaned from King Salomon and that Penda had already given battle with Cadwallon, been quickly defeated and then forced into joining his war band. This might mean that Edwin was unaware of the true strength of the enemy.

Peters’ speculates additionally that Edwin’s lookouts may have been fooled by the clever practice of both Cadwallon & Penda’s forces following in a single line of approach.

Geoffrey says that Edwin was aware that Cadwallon was marching towards Northumbria, intent upon despoliation and that accordingly he, “assembled all the petty kings of the Angles”.

He, “presently gave them battle but was killed, and almost all the people with him, together with Osfrid (aka Osfrith) his son, and Godbold, King of the Orkneys, who had come to their assistance”.

Peters speculates that Edwin arrived first and took the high ground, (probably Cuckney Hill, at its highest from where it is today bisected by the , and only about half a mile west of the small collection of houses that represent High Hatfield today).

The lack of road choices might have meant that Cadwallon and Penda came from the West (Exeter) via Derby. Thereafter a rapid joint advance would have been possible via Ryknield Street to Chesterfield and then Langwith.

If the weight of unexpected numbers caused Edwin’s forces to relinquish the high ground , then there is a (Northerly), direct, obvious and practical down hill route of flight of about half a mile to where Cuckney Church is today.

Compellingly, the road and the bridge that links Norton to Cuckney today (opposite the old Vicarage) , would not have existed, meaning that the River Poulter would have stopped any escape to the North or East. As Edwin’s troops were fleeing from the south and the enemy forces probably approached from the West, this would have left Edwin’s routed forces virtually encircled by the River Poulter, in the marshy land represented today by the meadow below the Church perimeter, hence it is probable that the bodies are likely to include more of Edwin’s men.

It is also worth considering that the bodies might represent only those fighting and dying in that tight enclave.

In practical terms, the burial site may merely have represented the first land that was suitable beyond the marshy area and the land does naturally rise around what is now the church perimeter. Also, it would not be feasible to transport large numbers of dead, heavy bodies very far.

It may be that Edwin had already been killed on the high ground around Cuckney Hill. Bede says that Edwin’s son, Osfrid, “was killed before his father” but makes no mention of any geographical circumstances.

The killing of Edwin may have provoked a breaking of his remaining ranks with at least some fleeing down hill logically towards the area now represented by the

church. Edwin’s body was reportedly transported by some escaping elements of his forces eastwards (probably the only direction left away from the line of the battle) for a few miles to what was to become known as (Edwin’s holy place or resting place).

It may not have been possible to rescue Edwin’s body if he had been trapped in the area around what now contains the church. Furthermore, when the same Penda killed King Oswald of Northumbria at the Battle of Maserfield, ( nine years later in 641 AD) , his captured body was dismembered, his head and limbs being placed on stakes. The victors make no such claims here.

During the 1951 excavations, no artefacts were found to help date the bodies and although Maurice Barley, Professor of Archaeology at University, did visit St. Mary’s, once, no dating of the skeletons took place and a wonderful opportunity to solve the mystery was lost.

The bodies were discovered in the region of the Church nave in trenches and in some places were, “heaped on one another to a depth ... of as much as seven feet” and “appeared to be the bodies of men”. (Revill P47). These also extended outside the Church on the north (i.e. meadow) side by at least seven feet.

Revill also provides further reasoning to elucidate Peters‘ remarks (in “Ancient Bassetlaw”, 1990) that there may be 800 bodies suggesting that, “It must be assumed also that the unexposed areas between the National Coal Board trenches had their quota”.

The Reverend Ashworth Lound (of St. Mary’s) personally counted some 200 skulls and a present Cuckney villager, then a choirboy, remembers seeing 20 to 30 skulls on display in the church, most of which seemed to have pick type damage. He believes that this was not caused by the Eastwood contractors during the 1951 operations.

Our Objectives

The Battle of Hatfield Investigation Society (“BOHIS”) was formed in March 2013.

In Phase 1 (Non Invasive) we wish to resolve the mystery surrounding the location of several mass burial trenches from which over 200 skeletons were unearthed, without

artefacts, from under and outside of St. Mary’s Church, Cuckney, by subsidence contractors in 1950/51. In addition we wish to examine the earthworks in the fields immediately adjacent to the church.

Phase 1 represents, “The Location and analysis of the skeletons allowing the proving and dating of the battle”.

This will be followed by Phase 2 (Invasive) which aims to date and analyse a sample of bones and teeth. This is in order to ascertain whether the bones date from the 7th Century and if strontium analysis of the teeth indicates that they are from Northumbria, Wales or Mercian regions.

A decision will then be made after academic and scientific investigation as to whether this represents the 632 AD Saxon conflict known as the Battle of Hatfield. This saw the first Christian King of Northumbria, Edwin, slain by the combined forces of King Cadwallon of Gwynedd and the Pagan, Prince Penda of Mercia.

Only if this was affirmative would we proceed to Phase 3 (the search for the site of the Battle of Hatfield).

Our Latest News

Since January 15th, the BOHIS now have formal written permission from the Diocese of Southwell & Nottingham for Phase 1 (Non Invasive) Investigations.

This means that we have all non invasive written permissions and additionally have invasive written permission for activities on Welbeck Estates land.

This means that only an absence of funding is preventing commencement of Phase 1 (Non Invasive Church & surrounding land).

We had a very constructive meeting with the Heritage Lottery fund (H.L.F.) on the 23rd of January and will be submitting a new higher grant application for c. £20k by mid. April 2015.

For this, BOHIS are also widening the Community involvement brief. It will now include other local groups and schools who may have an interest in the Battle of Hatfield and possibly some additional related subjects (like the investigation of the village landscape). We hope that this will provide compelling evidence to the H.L.F. of a true Community based project.

We will be in receipt of an H.L.F. grant decision by the end of June, which if successful, will allow Phase 1 work to start very shortly afterwards.

Additionally, we may be in receipt of a decision in very early March regarding funding from the local council. If this is in the affirmative, the award will range from £500 to £5,000.

However, presently our largest funder has been the C.B.A. with a welcome grant of £1,000 (from the Mick Aston Fund).

This has enabled us to produce very necessary advertising materials such as our Banner Stand and a thousand high quality, well received leaflets that help explain our objectives and provide a condensed and accessible history of Edwin and the Battle of Hatfield.

We have also purchased various technical drawings from English Heritage (originally commissioned from the architects Caroe’s by the National Coal Board re. subsidence operations). These show in detail the areas that were excavated for underpinning and hence where the bodies were initially found.

Finally, we have accepted an invitation from the National Trust (at Sutton Hoo) to present our project in September, starting with, “Our Quest”, followed by, “King Edwin and the Battle of Hatfield”, then, “Our Project Team”.

The final section will be, “Project Progress”, where we also hope to be able to deliver the results of Phase 1.