[MR] new book on the Bayeux Embroidery (Fwd: Artssciences Digest, Vol 21, Issue 12)

[SNSpies at aol.com]

Bouet,  Pierre, Brian Levy and Francois Neveux, eds. The Bayeux 
Tapestry:  Embroidering the Facts of History. Caen: Presses 
Universitaires de  Caen, 2004. Proceedings of the Cerisy Colloquium, 
1999.  Pp. 426.  $50.00 (hb). ISBN: 2-84133-213-6

Reviewed by George  Beech
Western Michigan University
Beech at wmich.edu

Not until the early 18th century  did interested observers in Bayeux 
first come to realize that the tapestry  then in the local cathedral 
treasury, subsequently known as the Bayeux  Tapestry (in fact an 
embroidery but commonly called a tapestry), might be  an early, hence 
valuable, source of information on the Norman Conquest of  England and 
also, an unusual survival of early textile art. Scholars both  English 
and French began to focus their attention on it in increasing  numbers 
in the 19th and 20th centuries but only in the past fifty years  has it 
become a subject matter in and of itself, rivaling some of the most  
famous artistic monuments of the Middle Ages in the number of studies  
dedicated to it. Published editions (Stenton 1957, Wilson 1985 et al.)  
contributed immeasurably to the growth of Bayeux studies by making  
available for the first time black/white and color photos of the entire  
hanging. Since the tapestry itself provides no explicit information  
about who commissioned it, for whom, nor about where and when it was  
produced, these questions became the prime concern of the earliest  
generations of scholars who studied it. Over the course of the past  
century specialists have come to believe that, although proof is  
lacking, William the Conqueror's half-brother Odo, bishop of Bayeux and  
Earl of Kent after 1066, ordered it to be produced at the English abbey  
of St. Augustine's of Canterbury for his cathedral in Normandy in the  
years after the Conquest. Art historians contributed fundamentally to  
this hypothesis by finding similarities between stylistic and scenic  
elements in the tapestry narrative and their counterparts in English  
illuminated manuscripts of the early 11th century. The possibility that  
the tapestry might provide valuable historical evidence on the Norman  
Conquest attracted the attention of political historians, and its  
immense wealth of pictorial images of castles, houses, ships, animals,  
knights, armor, and the like, has led specialists in those domains to  
investigate it closely.

Fascination with the tapestry has shown no  signs of waning in recent 
years. In 1997 the English art historian Richard  Gameson edited a 
collection of seminal articles in order to summarize the  state of the 
question in Bayeux studies at the time (The Study of the  Bayeux 
Tapestry, Woodbridge, 1997) and the American medievalist,  Martin 
Foys, followed this with a digital edition accompanied by  commentaries 
and bibliography in 2003 (The Bayeux Tapestry: Digital  Edition, 
2003). The book under review here, The Bayeux Tapestry:  Embroidering 
the Facts of History, a collection of articles presented  at a 
colloquium in Cerisy, Normandy in the fall of 1999, falls into the  same 
category. Edited by Francois Neveux and Pierre Bouet of the  University 
of Caen in Normandy and Brian Levy of the University of Hull in  
England, it publishes 21 papers on various aspects of the tapestry as  
presented at a colloquium held in the Norman cultural center at  
Cerisy-la-Salle in 1999 and organized by the editors with the support  
of the two universities, the town of Bayeux, and the French Ministry of  
Culture and Information. This colloquium brought together French and  
English scholars, mainly from the two universities in question (and one  
North American, Shirley Ann Brown, York University, Toronto), from the  
disciplines of history, art and literary history, and textile studies.  
The subjects of their papers make clear why tapestry studies continue  
to flourish despite the flood of publications in the recent past:  
little is known about certain essential aspects of the tapestry due to  
neglect in the past. Above all about the technical aspects, the  
production of this textile hanging, the materials (cloth, threads)  
used, the dyes, and the stitching. Modern experts did not have an  
opportunity to examine the reverse side of the tapestry until November  
1982 when it was moved into its present setting to the Centre de  
Guillaume le Conquerant in Bayeux, and then they had only ten days for  
photographing and studying it.

The first articles of this  collection deal with "The Artefact as 
Textile" and among these the central  one is: "The Technical Study of 
the Bayeux Embroidery," (83-101) by  Isabelle Bedat and Beatrice 
Girault-Kurtzeman, experts in textile history  and restoration. This is 
the first publication of their findings in their  examination of the 
tapestry in November 1982. One conclusion that is bound  to interest 
students of the subject is their view "that the entire  embroidery strip 
(upper and lower borders, inscriptions, and central  scenes) was 
embroidered in a single operation" (97). Prior to their  examination no 
one had any idea of the degree to which the tapestry had  been restored 
in the past. In the concluding article to the volume, "The  Bayeux 
Tapestry: The Establishment of a Text," (383-402) David Hill,  outlines 
the successive stages of restoration in an effort to point out  where 
the original differed from what one sees today. Other papers on the  
physical dimensions of the tapestry include Nicole de Reynies "The  
Bayeux Tapestry, or Bayeux Embroidery? Questions of Terminology"  
(69-76); Marie-Helene Didiers "The Bayeux Tapestry: an example of  
Textile Embroidery. A Report on the setting-up of the 1982-83 Research  
Project and Scientific Analysis," (77-82); Gabriel Vial's "The Bayeux  
Tapestry and its Backing Strip," (111-16), a study of the cloth  
attached to the back of the tapestry; and Brigitte Oger's "The Bayeux  
Tapestry: Results of the Scientific Tests 1982-83," (117-24). This  
latter paper gives the results of microbiological analysis of fibre,  
coloring, insect residue, and samples taken from the tapestry. Oger's  
comment "One hopes that future technology might offer answers to some  
of the questions raised by historians as to the place of origin of the  
embroidery linen and wool material," (122) makes clear that the 1982-83  
tests did not attempt to do this.

Another six articles represent  the research of historians. Two of these 
focus on written sources for the  Conquest and treat the tapestry only 
indirectly or briefly. From her  analysis of Orderic Vitalis' treatment 
of the Conquest, Marjorie Chibnall  concludes that this historian was 
not acquainted with, or did not make use  of, the tapestry in his 
history, "Orderic Vitalis and Bayeux Tapestry"  (127-34). Nor did the 
14th century compiler of the Grande Chronique de  Normandie in 
his account, a topic studied by Gillette Labory "The  Normand Conquest 
in the Grande Chronique de Normandie." (155-69) Whereas  specialists of 
the tapestry understand the main outlines of the story told  by the 
tapestry images and inscriptions, many of the details and lesser  
elements in the narrative are obscure. In her article "The Echo of the  
Conquest in the Latin Sources: Duchess Mathilda, her daughters and the  
Enigma of the Golden Child," (135-53) Elizabeth van Houts proposes a  
new and intriguing explanation for the figurehead of a child standing  
on the stern of a Norman ship crossing the channel for the invasion of  
England. This child blows a horn and carries a gonfanon in one hand.  
Van Houts matches this with the description of the ship commissioned by  
Mathilda to take her husband to England as taken from the contemporary  
Ship List of William the Conqueror. The author of this document  
specifies that the duchess had the figure of a golden child mounted on  
the ship's prow and holding a horn to its mouth. Drawing on Biblical  
texts and Roman Sibylline prophecies known at the time, van Houts  
suggests that to Mathilda the golden child may have been an allusion to  
the child she was herself then bearing, as well as to "the birth of a  
new future in England." In an evaluation of the designer's perspective  
in presenting the story of the Conquest, Pierre Bouet "Is the Bayeux  
Tapestry pro-English," (197-216) argues that Harold is made to appear  
in a more favorable light than previously believed. This is to be seen  
as part of William the Conqueror's conciliatory moves toward the  
English in the months immediately after 1066 in order to overcome  
opposition and win their support. That this attitude gave way to one of  
implacable force after 1068 means that, in Bouet's view, the tapestry  
dates to that two year period after 1066.

With virtual unanimity  modern scholars have believed that bishop Odo of 
Bayeux commissioned this  tapestry though his precise motivation in so 
doing is not obvious and  various explanations have been proposed. 
Drawing upon the nature of Odo's  interventions in the narrative, 
Valerie Flint, in her article "The Bayeux  Tapestry, the bishop, and the 
Laity," (217-33) believes that the  Conqueror's brother, whom she sees 
as the designer as well as the  commissioner, used the tapestry to 
defend the authority and rights of  feudal bishops such as himself, then 
under attack by Gregorian Reform.  Many military historians have mined 
the tapestry for its wealth of images  of weapons, armor, defensive 
structure, cavalry, archers, tactics and the  like. In his article "The 
Importance of the Bayeux Tapestry for the  history of war," (289-99) 
John France warns against the tendency to accept  the tapestry 
depictions of a military affairs as literally accurate. It  may be 
trusted with regard to matters of detail--weaponry for  instance--but in 
the portrayal of battle scenes the designer has  oversimplified or 
resorted to convention. The historical accuracy of the  tapestry 
narrative in comparison with that of written accounts continues  to 
preoccupy historians and Francois Neveux focuses mainly on it in his  
"The Bayeux Tapestry, Original Source." (171-96) Having no doubts about  
its overall accuracy he illustrates this with analyses of several  
individual scenes. At the same time he sees it as viewing events from a  
pro-Norman, and especially pro-Odo, perspective. His detection of  
distinctive narrative structures in the portrayal of the Harold/Guy of  
Ponthieux (scenes 7-13), and the death of Edward (scenes 24-34)  
sequences may be his most interesting contribution to the study of the  
tapestry.

The question of accuracy of the tapestry's images of  clothing and armor 
is raised by Olivier Renaudeau, a specialist in the  history of dress. 
Treating both civilian and knightly apparel, with  special attention to 
chain mail armor, he concludes that the artist and  the embroiderers 
have depicted these with care and precision in "The  Bayeux Tapestry and 
its Depiction of Costume: Problems of Interpretation"  (237-59).

Two scholars approach the tapestry from the art historical  perspective. 
Barbara English carries out an analysis of a single scene,  the crowning 
of Harold as king following the death of Edward, "The  Coronation of 
Harold in the Bayeux Tapestry" (347-81). Her concern was to  find 
parallels or analogies for the essential elements in this scene--the  
throne, arrangement of the figures present, the crown, robe, insignia,  
etc.--in contemporary manuscript illuminations, coins, and seals. From  
the artist's uncompromising presentation of Harold's coronation,  
Barbara English concludes that it dates "in the early years after 1066  
when the Normans were less hostile to Harold than they were to become  
(later)." In this she is in agreement with Pierre Bouet (see 197-215).  
In the second art historical essay, "The Bayeux Tapestry and Decoration  
in North-western Europe: Style and Composition," (303-26) Maylis Bayle,  
who has written extensively on Romanesque sculpture and architecture in  
Normandy, returns to the critical, and much discussed, question of the  
artistic world to which the tapestry belonged. Summarizing the findings  
of recent research on the topics of scene layout, style and decoration,  
the use of figures and drapery, and of colors, she concludes that the  
tapestry reflects the artistic conventions of what she calls the  
Anglo-Scandinavian region of northwestern Europe, and supports the  
arguments of the Anglo-Saxon school for a Canterbury provenance.

In  the past literary historians have paid less attention to the Bayeux  
Tapestry than their colleagues from the other disciplines. Nonetheless  
a few have argued that its narrative structure deserves careful  
analysis according to literary conventions of the day, and Brian Levy  
joins this small group with a suggestive essay, the only one of its  
kind in this colloquium, "Trifunctionality and Epic Patterning in the  
Bayeux Tapestry." (327-45) He argues that the tapestry designer has  
imposed a tripartite structure on his story of the Conquest, which  
features "three kings, three thrones, three feudal acts." In addition  
it opposes two families of three brothers each, interacting in three  
well-defined domains, with the actions taking place in "three  
castles--three great halls--and in three narrative segments," and  
involving three main cross sections of the society of the time, the  
Three Orders, those who prayed, those worked, and those who  fought.

Francois Neveux introduces this volume with a brief statement  about the 
objectives of the Cerisy colloquium (11-14) and a resume of the  main 
directions and accomplishments of tapestry scholarship in the past  two 
centuries, "The Great Bayeux Debate, 19th-20th centuries" (17-25).  
Following this, Shirley Ann Brown, "The Bayeux Tapestry: A Critical  
Analysis of Publications 1988-99," (27-47) concentrates on scholarship  
on the tapestry in the eleven years preceding the colloquium, an  
updating of her 1988 book on this subject. Her chronological list of  
publications appears at the end of the volume, pages 411-18. Another  
most unusual addition to tapestry studies comes from Sylvette LeMagnen,  
director of the mediatheque in Bayeux, "The Bayeux Tapestry under  
German Occupation. New Light on the Mission Led by Herbert Jankuhn  
during the Second World War" (49-64). In this article LeMagnen recounts  
how, in 1992, with the cooperation of German cultural authorities, she  
brought to light documents describing investigations into the tapestry  
by a group of German scholars led by Herbert Jahnkuhn, a Viking  
specialist at Kiel, in 1941 during the occupation. Whether this group  
made original contributions to the body tapestry knowledge will become  
apparent only with the publication of these materials, a task being  
undertaken by the author. Finally, Francois Neveux summarizes the  
accomplishments of the Cerisy colloquium in his "The Cerisy Colloquium:  
Conclusions" (403-10).

One of the outstanding features of this  volume is its publication of 
well over 200 photographic reproductions of  superb quality, both in 
black and white and in color. In addition to this  many diagrams and 
drawings accompany the text. After going through this  book I can only 
wonder how the editors and the Presses Universitaires de  Caen able to 
publish it, in both English and French versions, for only  39.50 euros 
($50.00). This is an indispensable contribution to tapestry  studies.