Why is the Bayeux Tapestry so controversial?

The 11th century was a tumultuous period in the annals of England and Normandy, setting the stage for the events depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry.

In the early 1000s, England was a patchwork of territories often at odds with each other, while across the English Channel, the Duchy of Normandy was growing in power and influence under its ambitious dukes.

The tapestry's narrative begins in the context of the reign of King Edward the Confessor, who ascended to the English throne in 1042.

Edward, having spent many of his early years in exile in Normandy, had strong ties to the Norman court.

This connection would sow the seeds of future conflicts. As Edward's reign progressed, the question of his succession became a pressing concern.

He had no direct heirs, and several powerful figures eyed the English throne with ambition.

One of these figures was Harold Godwinson, a powerful English earl with a claim to the throne.

Another was William, Duke of Normandy, who believed he had been promised the English crown by Edward himself.

The exact nature of this promise remains a matter of historical debate, but it's clear that William was convinced of his right to rule.

In January 1066, Edward the Confessor died, and the Witenagemot, England's council of nobles, quickly crowned Harold as king.

This decision did not sit well with William. He viewed Harold's coronation as a direct challenge to his own claim and began preparations for an invasion.

By September, William had amassed a formidable fleet and army, ready to cross the English Channel.

The climax of this brewing conflict was the Battle of Hastings on October 14, 1066.

Harold's forces, weary from another battle against a different invader in the north, faced William's well-prepared Norman army.

The day ended in a decisive victory for the Normans and the death of King Harold.

William was subsequently crowned King of England on Christmas Day, marking the beginning of Norman rule in England and a profound shift in the nation's cultural, political, and social fabric.

Contrary to its name, the "tapestry" is not a woven piece but rather an embroidery, meticulously stitched onto a linen canvas using colored woolen yarns.

The entire piece measures an impressive 70 meters (approximately 230 feet) in length and 50 centimeters (about 20 inches) in height, making it a monumental work of art by any standard.

The tapestry's palette is dominated by terracotta, olive green, dull gold, and blue hues, with the occasional use of other colors to highlight specific details.

The stitches employed are mainly two types: the stem stitch, used for outlining figures and details, and the laid-and-couched stitch, which fills in the larger areas of color.

These techniques give the images a certain texture and depth, making them stand out vividly against the linen backdrop.

The scenes depicted on the tapestry are organized in a continuous, linear narrative, much like a visual storybook or a comic strip of the modern era.

Each scene is separated by stylized trees or other decorative elements, providing a visual break and indicating a transition in the narrative.

The main action unfolds in the central horizontal band, flanked by narrower top and bottom borders.

These borders are not mere decorative afterthoughts; they often contain figures of animals, mythological creatures, and other motifs that sometimes complement and at other times contrast with the central narrative, adding layers of meaning and interpretation to the overall story.

The figures in the tapestry, whether human or animal, are depicted with a sense of dynamism and movement.

Their postures, expressions, and gestures are surprisingly detailed, capturing the emotions and tensions of the events portrayed. 

The story begins with a depiction of King Edward the Confessor, the then-reigning monarch of England, conversing with Harold Godwinson, one of the most powerful nobles in the realm.

This initial scene sets the stage for the drama to come, hinting at the promises and understandings that would later be contested.

The tapestry then portrays Harold's journey across the English Channel to the lands of Normandy.

While the reasons for this journey remain a subject of debate among historians, the tapestry suggests that Harold was sent by King Edward to affirm the promise of the English throne to William, the Duke of Normandy.

However, the narrative takes a turn when Harold, after being captured by a rival Norman lord and subsequently released to William, takes an oath on sacred relics.

The exact nature of this oath is ambiguous, but it's clear that William perceives it as a pledge of loyalty and possibly an acknowledgment of William's claim to the English throne.

The tapestry then shifts its focus back to England, where King Edward's death and Harold's subsequent coronation as king set the stage for the impending conflict.

The tension escalates as preparations for war are vividly depicted. On one side, Harold rallies his troops and fortifies the English coast.

On the other, William commissions a fleet of ships and gathers an army, ready to stake his claim by force.

The tapestry captures the anticipation and gravity of the moment, with scenes of soldiers arming themselves, ships being loaded, and both leaders strategizing their next moves.

The climax of the tapestry's narrative is the Battle of Hastings, rendered in meticulous detail.

The chaos of battle is palpable, with Norman knights charging, English shield walls holding firm, and arrows flying in all directions.

Central to this scene is the tragic death of King Harold, depicted with an arrow striking his eye, a moment that sealed the fate of the English resistance.

The tapestry concludes with the Normans pursuing the retreating English forces, leaving the viewer with a sense of the profound shift in power and the dawn of a new era in English history. 

Since its discovery, scholars, historians, and enthusiasts have grappled with questions surrounding its origins, intentions, and the veracity of its depictions.

One of the primary debates centers around the tapestry's commissioning. Who was behind this grand project?

While it's widely accepted that the tapestry was created in the 1070s, just a few years after the Battle of Hastings, the identity of its patron remains a subject of speculation.

Some argue that it was Bishop Odo, William the Conqueror's half-brother and the Earl of Kent, given that he features prominently in several scenes and would have had the resources to fund such an endeavor.

Others suggest that it might have been commissioned by Queen Matilda, William's wife, or another member of the Norman aristocracy, aiming to legitimize and celebrate the Norman conquest.

The tapestry's place of creation is another point of contention. While its stylistic elements and techniques are consistent with Anglo-Saxon craftsmanship of the time, suggesting it was made in England, the distinct Norman perspective of the narrative has led some to believe it might have been crafted in Normandy.

The portrayal of certain events and figures in the tapestry has also sparked debate.

The reasons behind Harold Godwinson's journey to Normandy, as depicted in the early scenes, remain unclear.

Was he sent by King Edward to affirm the English throne's promise to William, or were his intentions different?

The tapestry's depiction of Harold's death, with an arrow striking his eye, is another contentious point.

While this image has become iconic, some historians argue that it might be a later modification or a symbolic representation rather than a literal account of his demise.

Furthermore, the tapestry's very nature as a piece of propaganda comes into question.

While it undoubtedly offers a Norman-centric view of the events, emphasizing their claims and vilifying their adversaries, it's worth noting the moments of empathy and nuance in its narrative.

The tapestry doesn't shy away from showcasing the horrors of war or the toll it takes on both sides, suggesting a more complex intent than mere glorification.

In essence, the Bayeux Tapestry, like many historical artifacts, is a puzzle with missing pieces.

While it provides an unparalleled visual chronicle of the Norman conquest, it also leaves gaps, ambiguities, and mysteries in its wake.

These controversies, far from diminishing its value, only enhance its allure, inviting generations to unravel its threads and interpret its tales.