Illustration: Scene from the Bayeux tapestry, 11th century.
The Bayeux tapestry is of course not technically a tapestry but in fact an embroidery. However, often large embroidered hangings have been termed embroidered tapestries and the word tapestry itself, in this case at least, seems to apply to the size of the embroidery rather than its similarity to a tapestry.
Most now see the Bayeux tapestry as being English made, although there is still some continuing debate as to a French origin. However, its more obvious use was as a Norman propaganda piece where the story of the Norman invasion and occupation of England was twisted to suit the victor, as is always the case.
Illustration: Two scenes from the Bayeux tapestry, 11th century.
The tapestry was set out as a long narrative. In some respects, it could be seen as a song or ballad of the story of William and Harold. It was of course meant to reflect both treachery and betrayal, two vital ingredients to any good ballad. William was of course seen as being the injured party with Harold being portrayed as the betrayer. However, from an English standpoint it was seen as a fateful tragedy with William always being seen within the context of a brutal and aggressive opportunist with Harold playing the role of fateful victim.
The Norman invasion has been seen in many guises, ranging from that of the first chapter of the long tradition of aristocracy and institutions that leads up to and includes much that is modern day Britain, to one of unmitigated disaster for England and the common man as well as the painful history of Wales and Ireland from the initial Norman invasions, and the later cycle of wars between England and France. It is perhaps wise in some respects that the Bayeux tapestry remains in Normandy along with most of the Norman kings who ruled England from 1066.
Illustration: Two scenes from the Bayeux tapestry, 11th century.
As to the practical tapestry itself, it was produced with wool on a bleached linen background. The dimensions of the surviving tapestry, it has a missing end, is over 70 metres long with a height of about 50 centimetres. The wool was dyed into eight distinct colours ranging from red, yellow, buff, three types of green and two blues. Because of the phenomenal length of the tapestry, it is actually made up of eight strips of linen of various lengths, which were produced by a number of women, possibly simultaneously.
Interestingly, the start of the tapestry shows the coronation of the English king Edward the Confessor at Westminster Abbey. It is thought that the missing end of the tapestry shows the coronation of the Norman king William the Conqueror also at Westminster Abbey. Although this can never be verified it would seem plausible that if the tapestry were displayed around the walls of a large enough room, the two ends would be near enough to each other to create a symbolic link between Edward and William the one being the others natural successor. This would have given William a form of legitimacy through embroidery, one that would have been both obvious and public. This would also have placed Harold II's coronation the last English Saxon king as lost part way through the tapestry theme and therefore of less significance.
Illustration: Two scenes from the Bayeux tapestry, 11th century.
If the missing end of the tapestry truly did show the coronation of William the Conqueror it is intriguing to hypothesise as to whether William's final revenge disintegrated through time or whether it was purposely removed by an incensed Englishman, we will probably never know. However, it is interesting to think that William's legitimacy through his crowning at Westminster Abbey has been removed whether purposely or through accident from the Bayeux tapestry. Although the Saxon England of the pre-Norman era was by no means a perfect society, the Bayeux could be seen as a painful reminder of an England that had to endure centuries of rule by an elite that were by no means known for their light hand.
Despite this, the tapestry is an important and substantial piece of textile craft surviving from the 11th century. Although embroidery examples from this period and before do survive in Northern Europe, they are perhaps not as voluminous as a 70 metre length showing a pivotal moment in both English and ultimately French history.
Illustration: Two scenes from the Bayeux tapestry, 11th century.
The Bayeux Tapestry Embroiderers' Story
The Bayeux Tapestry
1066: The Hidden History in the Bayeux Tapestry
The Bayeux Tapestry: The Life Story of a Masterpiece
The Bayeux Tapestry
A Needle in the Right Hand of God: The Norman Conquest of 1066 and the Making and Meaning of the Bayeux Tapestry
The Bayeux Tapestry: Monument to a Norman Triumph (Art & Design S.)
The Bayeux Tapestry: The Complete Tapestry in Colour
The Bayeux Tapestry: New Interpretations
The Rhetoric of Power in the Bayeux Tapestry (Cambridge Studies in New Art History and Criticism)
The Bayeux Tapestry and the Norman Invasion
The Bayeux Tapestry: The Story of the Norman Conquest: 1066
Anglo-Saxon Propaganda in the Bayeux Tapestry (Studies in French Civilization)
The Study of the Bayeux Tapestry
7 comments:
It is a splendid piece of textile art which i always enjoy seeing along witht the Apocalypse tapestry in the chateau of Angers!
like illuminated prayer books for the illiterate. i just picked up a 50's kid illustrated history book. cave man to the nuclear age. it's quite neat. plus i am re-reading the history of france and the english and the french have always sort of been intertwined. as were the danes + england. i demand a history degree by the time i finish the 1891 encyclopedia britannica's Z.
I have seen this magnificent work in person.It is mounted on a very large round wall in a dimly lit room. You put on head phones and listen to the story as you walk around this beautiful tapestry. It really comes to life. I found myself holding up the line because I couldn't help stoppin to look closely at all of the stitching.
The first image is a rendering of the tapestry, not a direct photo, right? It looked like it. Made me want to look more closely at the original, though. Have wanted to for ages, but other projects get in the way. This close-up of the epigraphy--if rendered as in the original--is an amazing example of a Romanesque version of ancient Roman imperial-style epigraphy, something which was taking place in sculpture, too (though there are significant differences between the ancient and Romanesque versions).
I don't know how many of your readers actually have done embroidery (which can employ a variety of stitches to achieve different effects on a background that remains bare cloth), and it's been years since I've done it, too, since I switched over to needlepoint (which employs a dot-effect stitch, and covers the entire surface of a, by now, specially made canvas), but I thought they might like to know just how long it takes to do this stuff. I work on 18-point canvas (that means 18 holes to the inch, very fine, but not yet "petit point"; most work on 12-point, I think), and it takes me about three hours just to cover a space big enough to cover with my index finger!
One question in closing...are there records that prove that women were the workers on the embroidery? During the Middle Ages and Renaissance, men, too, were frequently employed in doing ecclesiastical embroidery, a topic with which I'm more familiar.
Thanks, as usual, for your wonderful posts.
These are not direct photos but nineteenth century renderings and are therefore clearer and more concise than the original.
Women rather than men, produced embroidery work in England during this particular period and were famed as some of the best embroiderers at least in this part of North-Western Europe. It is believed that the defeated English were used to produce the tapestry both because they were known for their skilled work, but also possibly because of the symbolic reasoning of using the defeated to produce propaganda work for the victors.
That would have been a heavy handed symbolic task, indeed. Thanks!
In the grand scheme of things Anglo-Normans were less than subtle.
Post a Comment