Talk:Battle, East Sussex

Town vs Village

To be a town it must have a Town Charter, but I can find nothing either confirming or denying this, so I'll leave it be. Personally, I'm not sure that quantity of tea shops and knick knack stores that Battle offers really counts as a "range of amenities", and is no better than other nearby villages, eg Robertsbridge. nick 14:11, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Administration

Because Battle is not an autonomous town or city with no local government of its own, I found it prudent to add that Battle is located in the local government district of Rother, to give people some idea of the administration of the town. --Criticalthinker 08:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Tunnels

"Battle was a refuge in World War I, and tunnels still exist, leading from various fields and cellars to Battle Abbey itself. However, they are deemed unsafe and are now closed."

Whilst it is popular myth that there are tunnels leading between cellars of pubs and old houses to the Abbey (amongst the rumoured are the Almonry, the King's Head and the now-closed 1066), there's no documented evidence of this. Does anyone have any - and if not, is it worth removing this line or at least changing the wording to "it is rumoured that tunnels exist, leading..."? --81.174.134.119 (talk) 11:34, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Name of the town

I've read that the town's name was changed to Battle (for obvious reasons), and that it had been called Senlac prior to that. Is this true? My understanding is that the Abbey was built on Senlac Hill, and then the town grew up around it-- but was that town originally called Senlac, and if so, when was the name changed? I have ancestors born in "Battle, Sussex," but when I see that birthplace name applied to the ones who were born before 1066, it raises these questions I've posed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxfirebrand (talk • contribs) 01:38, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The name Senlac originates from after the battle, its meaning is "Blood Lake" referring to the battle. See Senlac Hill for a more detailed etymology. Putney Bridge (talk) 11:12, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

City?

As a child, I was taught that Battle was technically a city, because of the Abbey. Is that nonsense? Was it ever true? --Dweller (talk) 17:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't find anything to support this. The authoritative Extensive Urban Survey undertaken by the West Sussex County Council (https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/living/planning/the_county_plan/west_sussex_character_project/extensive_urban_surveys_eus.aspx) only every refers to the town as a town. Amosharper (talk) 09:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

See City status in the United Kingdom. Originally, Cities had cathedrals (not Abbeys), so Battle would not fall under this criteria. Periglio (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Battle, East Sussex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929064250/http://www.battlemuseum.org.uk/guy_fawkes.htm to http://www.battlemuseum.org.uk/guy_fawkes.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415162659/http://212.104.140.187:80/index.cfm?articleid=2378 to http://212.104.140.187/index.cfm?articleid=2378
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415123241/http://www.english-nature.org.uk:80/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1005748 to http://www.english-nature.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1005748
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415130105/http://www.english-nature.org.uk:80/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1001586 to http://www.english-nature.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1001586
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415123201/http://www.english-nature.org.uk:80/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1002162 to http://www.english-nature.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1002162

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)