This image is a close-up of a small section of Tapestry (from \
panel \
133). Use the " Compare" button to view the reversed side of this \
section and to examine the technique of laid and couched needlework \
(see Introduction: \
Manufacture & Length). The back image has been reversed \
for the convenience of comparison. In this image, the warp and weft \
of the backing linen, which Bertrand (1966, 23) reports is 18 x 19 \
per square centimeter is plainly visible.
\
\
Published with special permission of the City of Bayeux, Normandy, \
France.
A replica of the Tapestry hanging in the nave of the Bayeux \ Cathedral. \
Several scholars have adduced evidence to prove the Tapestry is \
religious in nature and/or was designed to hang in the nave of the \
Bayeux Cathedral. For a complete discussion, see Introduction: Location and \
Purpose. See also Museum: Anglo-Saxon Hall \
for an alternative locale of display.
\
\
Published with special permission of the City of Bayeux, Normandy, \
France.
The Tapestry, as imagined hanging in the dining hall of Dover \ Priory, Kent, by Barnett Miller
\In reviews of possible scenarios for the original context of the \
Tapestry, Bernstein (1986, 105-106), \
Dodwell (1966, 549 ff.) and \
others consider that the textile may have been designed for a \
secular hall. See Introduction: Location and Purpose for a full \
discussion. See also Museum: Cathedral for an facsimile of \
the Tapestry hanging in the nave of Bayeux Cathedral.
\
\
Image source: Bernstein (1986).
An engraving of the winch on which the Bayeux Tapestry was stored
\Thomas Frognall Dibdin (1829, 247) was an \ early nineteenth-century antiquarian who traveled to Bayeux and \ viewed the Tapestry before its mid-nineteenth century restoration \ and encasing.
\In his travelogue, he includes the image seen here and \ writes:
\It is right, first of all, that you should have \ an idea how this piece of tapestry is preserved, or rolled up. You \ see it here, therefore, precisely as it appears after the person \ who shews it, takes off the cloth with which it is usually \ covered.
\Likewise, Hudson Gurney (1817, 359) describes \
viewing the Tapestry on a trip in 1814 and reports that "it was \
coiled round a machine, like that which lets down buckets to a \
well; and I had the opportunity of drawing it out at leisure, over \
a table."
\
\
Image source: Dibdin (1829, 247).
A magnified image of the seal of King Edward the \ Confessor.
\Wilson (1985, 174) notes that \
this seal closely resembles the iconographic depiction of Edward in \
panel 1 \
(click "toggle screen" to see).
\
\
Image source: Barlow (1979)
Joseph giving instructions to his steward, c. 1050, British \ Lib. MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f.65r
\Brooks (1978, 11) has used this \ illumination as evidence that for understanding the relationship \ between Harold and Edward in panel 1 (click "toggle screen" to see). \ Brooks argues that the touching of index fingers here shows "that \ the artist intended Edward to be understood as giving instructions \ to Harold for in late Saxon pictorial narrative this arrangement of \ hands is used to show a master instructing his servant."
\For a full discussion, see panel 1.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Bosham village church, interior.
\Taylor (1992, 3) argues that the \ church shown in panel 4 (click "toggle screen" to see) \ depicts the inner chancel arch of Bosham village church as well as \ the outside of the structure, conforming to a medieval convention \ of conflating internal and external architectural features. See \ also Glossary: Bosham and \ Museum: \ Westminster .
\For full discussion, see panel 4.
\
\
Image source: Taylor (1992)
A representation of a town house from a capital at Moissac
\Compare the stone spiral stairs here to the steps of Harold\'s \
manor in panel 6 (click "toggle screen" to \
see).
\
\
Image originally appeared in Speculum: vol. 34 (1959). \
Reproduced by permission.
Abraham slings stones at birds, c. 1050, from British Lib. \ MS Cotton Claudius, Biv, f.26v).
\Wormald (1957, 32), Wilson (1985, \ 210) and Bernstein (1986, 40) compare the \ slinger in the lower border of panel 23 to this figure (click "toggle \ screen" to see). For full discussion, see panel 23.
\Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \ prohibited.
'; museum["seed"]={"ref":"seed", "label":"Sowing seeds", "compare": "1", "catalogue":"Sowing seeds in the Harley Psalter","html":"", "currentC":"0", "isFS":"0"}; museum["seed"].html='A sower of seeds from a copy of the Utrecht Psalter, British Lib. \ MS Harley 603, f.21
\Wormald \
(1952, pl. 32) compares the agrarian scene in the lower border of \
panel 22 \
(click "toggle screen" to see) to several found in contemporary \
English manuscripts and specifically relates the sower to this \
drawing. Wormald describes the figure from the Tapestry as also \
using the folds of his tunic to hold seeds when actually it appears \
that the Tapestry sower uses a basket of some sort.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Winter ploughing and sowing, from a mid-eleventh-century hymnal and \ calender, British Lib. MS Cotton Julius Avi, f.3r
\Wormald (1957, 28) and Bernstein \
(1986, 74-75) compare the plough in the lower border of \
panel 21 \
(click "toggle screen" to see) to other realistically depicted \
ploughs in eleventh-century English calenders. See also Glossary: Tools and \
Implements.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
A circular pavilion from the Harley Psalter, c. 1000, \ British Lib. MS Harley 603, f.1v
\Mann (1974, 63) and Bernstein \
(1986, 44) believe this structure in panel 25 (click "toggle screen" to see) \
is modeled on a classical depiction of either a summer pavilion or \
a Temple of Love, and suggest the direct influence of this \
image.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
The building of the Tower of Babel, c. 1050, from British \ Lib. MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f.19.
\Bernstein (1986, 78) argues that \
this illumination illustrates the same decorative use of colored \
bricks as found in the palace walls of panel 28 (click \
"toggle screen" to see). See Museum: Escape by Rope for similar \
example of this convention. For full discussion, see panel 28.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Bear baiting in a Canterbury initial from British Lib. Arundel MS
\ 91, f.47b. Wormald (1957, 32) compares the \ bear-baiting scene in panel 26 to this image (click "toggle \ screen" to see). Yapp (1987, 42), however, disagrees \ and contends that this analogue is without justification and "has \ no resemblance beyond the bare subject." It is unknown if any pun \ was intended by Yapp. \For full discussion, see panel 26.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Rahb lowering Israelite spies from the walls of Jericho, c. \ 1050, British Lib. MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f.141v \
This image shows a strong resemblance to Conan II\'s escape from \ Dol in panel 47 and the use of colored bricks \ as decorative embellishment (click "toggle screen" to see).
\Mann \
(1974, 63), studying the fortification in panel 28, uses this \
image to draw structural parallels between the crenelations and \
colored bricks found in both buildings (see also Museum: Colored \
Bricks).
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
\
An image of a horseman from the Spanish Roda Bible, c. 1025 \
(Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS Lat. 6, f.145r).
Rectangular ornamentation on Norman mail appears periodically in \
the Tapestry (e.g. panel 41, panels 55-56, and \
panels \
123 ff.), but no one has yet conclusively identified its purpose \
(click "toggle screen" to see an example from the Tapestry). \
Loomis (1923, 6) and Mann (1957, 63) \
both study this ornamentation and find analogues in earlier \
manuscripts from southern Europe. Mann conjectures that this item \
might be "a double application of mail on that vulnerable part of \
the body" or possibly "some . . . plastron of plate armour worn \
beneath the mail, but fastened to it by thongs." As this object is \
found often on noted aristocrats (Harold, William, Eustace), it \
might also be a decoration of rank or of ceremonial status. See \
also panel 41 and Glossary: \
Armor.
\
\
Reproduced by permission of the Bibliothèque nationale de \
France.
A wooden core of a house-shrine, about 75 cm. long, \ Cèrisy-la-Fôret, c. 1125
\The reliquaries shown in panel 59 share many stylistic features \
with this near-contemporary artifact (click "toggle screen" to \
see). For a discussion of the nature of the reliquaries of the \
Tapestry, see panel 59.
\
\
Image source: Lasko (1994)
Isaac blessing Jacob, c. 1050, British Lib. MS Cotton \ Claudius Biv, f.43r
\Scholars, most notably Wilson (1985, 198) and Brooks (1978, \ 10-11) have interpreted Harold\'s posture upon his return to King \ Edward in panel 64 as cringing or fearful (click \ "toggle screen" to see). Note however, that such a stance may also \ imply a sense of respect, or subservience, as in this scene between \ Isaac and Jacob.
\For a full discussion, see panel 64.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
A reconstructed view of Westminster Abbey at the end of the \ eleventh century, by W.T. Ball \
Lampl (1961, 12) argues that the \
depiction of Westminster Abbey in panel 67 (click "toggle screen" to \
view) conflates both exterior and interior features, and collapses \
several planes of perspective as well (see also Museum: \
Bosham ). Such claims seem to be substantiated by \
this rendering, which also shows inner and outer features, albeit \
from a modern perspective. See also panel 67 and Museum: \
Jumièges .
\
\
Reproduced with permission from St. Martin\'s Press.
The remains of the Abbey of Jumièges, east end, dedicated in \ 1067
\The view shows the nave, revealed because the apse has been \ destroyed. The structural features of this abbey closely match \ those of Westminster Abbey, and particularly its depiction in \ panel 67 \ (click "toggle screen" to see). Uncannily, the present state of the \ abbey with exposed nave provides a concise analogue to how the \ Tapestry\'s representation of Westminster removes the outer wall of \ the structure and thereby conflates interior and exterior \ architectural features.
\Barlow (1992, 69, n.168) notes that \
both structures were built by Robert Champart, a close friend of \
King Edward who was buried at Westminster. See also Museum: \
Westminster. For a full discussion of the Tapestry\'s \
representation of Westminster Abbey, see panel 67.
\
Joseph is embalmed and buried, c. 1050, British Lib. MS \ Cotton Claudius Biv, f.72v
\Dodwell (1982, 162) considers the \
similarity of the scenes of preparing King Edward\'s corpse for \
burial in panel 68 and panel 70 (click \
"toggle screen" to see the latter) to this image and notes \
connections with "the Canterbury artist who made the underdrawings \
for the Tapestry." As with other analogues from the Hexateuch, \
Dodwell is not suggesting an instance of direct copying here - \
rather, as with all of his comparisons of the Tapestry to MS Cotton \
Claudius Biv, he merely notes that each of the two artists takes \
his style from the similar, creative source of everyday \
observation. See also panel 68 for a discussion of silk \
remnants found in Edward\'s tomb.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
A scene from the life of David, from the Bible of St. Vaast (Arras, \ Bibl. Mun., MS 559, Vol.1, f.128v)
\This is a Continental analogue to Edward\'s deathbed scene and \
the image of the anchored bed curtain in panel 70 (click \
"toggle screen" to see). Note also the enscrolled detailing in the \
top corners of the image, similar to the Scandinavian Ringerike \
style found throughout the Tapestry, and also the claw feet of the \
bed, a feature of many of the thrones in the Tapestry.
\
\
Reproduced with permission from Bibliothèque municipale \
d\'Arras.
A scene of wood-cutting, c. 1100, from British Lib. MS \ Cotton Tiberius Bv, f.6r.
\Wilson (1985, 209) and Bernstein \
(1986, 77) cite the vegetation in Tiberius Bv as a close analogue \
to that in the Tapestry (click "toggle screen" for example). See \
also Glossary: Vegetation \
.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Noah building the ark, using an adze-like instrument, c. \ 1050, British Lib. MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f.13v \
Dodwell (1974, plate 72) has \
compared this figure to the Norman shipbuilder in panel 83 (click \
"toggle screen" to see). However, Dodwell (70) does not suggest an \
instance of direct copying here - rather, as with all of his \
comparisons of the Tapestry to Cotton Claudius Biv, he merely notes \
that each of the two artists takes his style from a similar, \
creative source by "not copying the pictures of a remote and \
long-forgotten age," but instead by "thinking in terms of his own \
life and times." See also Glossary: Weapons \
(Axes) and Glossary: Tools . For a \
description of the process of shipbuilding, see Glossary: Norman \
Shipbuilding.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Normans in a ship from Life of St. Aubin, St. Aubin \
Monastery, Angers, ca. 1100; (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, \
MS Nouv. acq. Lat. 1390, f.7r). Bernstein (1986, 70-72) discusses \
the differences of this representation to those of transported \
Normans in the Tapestry (click "toggle screen" to see William\'s \
ship, from panel 98). See also Glossary: \
Ships .
\
\
Reproduced by permission from the Bibliothèque nationale de \
France.
Two renderings of Carolingean coins from Dorested
\In his discussion of the object depicted on the topsail of \
William\'s flagship in panel 98 (click "toggle screen" to \
see), Grape (1994, 39) argues that crosses \
were commonly used as iconographic topmarks in depictions of ships, \
and cites these coins as one example. See also Glossary: \
Banners .
\
\
Published by permission of Professor Detlev Ellmers. Originally \
appeared in Ellmers\' Fruhmittelalterliche Handelsschiffahrt in \
Mittel Und Nordeuropa. Neumunster: Karl Wchholts, 1972, figures \
39c-d.
A horse being unloaded from the replica of the Viking longship from \ Ladby, Denmark
\In his discussion of the disembarkation of horses, shown in \
panel \
102 (click "toggle screen" to see), Grape \
(1994, 39) references the successful transportation of 4 horses in \
the reconstructed tenth-century Danish ship from Ladby. These \
horses embarked and disembarked in a fashion similar to that shown \
in the Tapestry. Bachrach (1987, 11-12), however, \
studies the Tapestry\'s representation of William\'s horse \
transports, and concludes the designer was ignorant of the \
specialized structures needed for, and the difficulties attendant \
to, transporting and landing horses in battle-ready condition. \
Bachrach discounts the Danish effort as having "failed by a wide \
margin," and asserts that "the Tapestry is not only incorrect in \
its depiction of the nature of the landing, but provides a \
rendering of it that is technically not possible." See also \
Glossary:Channel \
Crossing.
\
\
Image source: Grape (1994)
\ Labor and other allegories from Prudentius\' Psychomachia (British \ Lib. MS Cotton Cleopatra, Cviii, f.27).
\Wormald (1957, 32) and Dawson (1907, \
291) have argued a close connection between this figure and a \
similar one in panel 107 (click "toggle screen" to \
see). Wormald in particular argues that this figure is a direct \
misreading of the figure of Labor. For full discussion, see \
panel \
107.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
Last Supper from the Gospel Book of St. Augustine, late sixth \ century, Cambridge Corpus Christi MS 286, f.125
\Much has been made of the highly suggestive iconography of feast \
scene from panel 112. Loomis (1927, \
77) argues that the scene is a direct imitation of this scene from \
the sixth-century Cambridge Gospels of St. Augustine and therefore \
direct evidence for a Canterbury origin of the Tapestry (click \
"toggle screen" to view feast scene from the Tapestry). However, \
the scenes differ dramatically. The table here is round, while the \
table in the Tapestry is sigma-shaped. Additionally, the Augustine \
illumination does not depict a servant, as a round table would not \
allow such a depiction. See panel 112 for a full discussion of \
this scene. Cf. Museum: Last Supper II .
\
\
Reproduced by permission of the Master and Fellows of Corpus \
Christi College, Cambridge.
Last Supper from Saint-Maure-des-Fosses, c.1070 (Paris, \ Bibliothèque Nationale MS Lat.12054, f.79).
\In his discussion of the feast scene in panel 112, \
Grape (1994, 30-31) points out that \
the iconography of the Last Supper was far more common in \
Continental manuscripts than in English ones, where he believes it \
was quite rare. Grape argues that a number of Continental \
manuscripts closely parallel the feast scene, citing this \
illumination as one example (click "toggle screen" to see). See \
also Museum: \
Last Supper I .
\
\
Reproduced by permission of the Bibliothèque nationale de \
France.
Council in front of a pedimented building, from the Utrecht \ Psalter, Reims, c. 820, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, \ Utrecht, MS 32, Psalm 57 (58), f.32v.
\Both Mann (1974, 62) and Bernstein \ (1986, 43) compare the structure in the so-called "family portrait" \ in panel \ 113 (click "toggle screen" to see) to similar structures \ illuminated in the Utrecht Psalter and its English copy, British \ Lib. MS Harley 603.
\For a full discussion of this scene, see panel 113.
\
\
Reproduced by permission of Rijksuniversiteit, Utrecht.
The figure of Philosophy, consoling Boethius, from an early \ eleventh-century French illumination (Paris, Bibliothèque \ Nationale, MS Lat. 6401, f.5v)
\Grape (1994, 76) argues this figure \
is the stylistic ancestor to Anglo-Norman figures such as the woman \
from the burning house in panel 118.
\
\
Reproduced by permission of the Bibliothèque nationale de \
France.
Letter T containing scenes from the life of Saint Caesarius, \ c.1110, British Lib. MS Arundel 91, f.188.
\Bernstein (1986, 52) compares the \
falling horse in this initial to those in panels 155-156 \
(click "toggle screen" to see), noting a similar posture of the \
horses, and an interaction between border and main scene.
\
\
Image copyright British Library. Further reproduction is \
prohibited.
A drawing from Sir Christopher Hatton\'s Book of Seals, \ showing a copy of Bishop Odo of Bayeux\'s seal
\In panel 158 (click on "Toggle Screen" to see), \ Bishop Odo of \ Bayeux is shown in the thick of battle. Like the \ Tapestry, Odo\'s seal shows both his ecclesiastical and secular \ side.
\This seal was copied by Hatton in 1640 or 1641, before it was \
damaged in the 1731 fire of the Cotton Library, and then lost. \
Cf. Hayward (1984, 75).
\
\
Image source: Hayward (1984)
A decapitation scene with King Antiochus of Syria from the Initial \ F, in an early twelfth-century Bible, Bibliothèque \ Municipale Dijon MS 14
\Three figures in the Tapestry wear a similarly ornately \
patterned outfit: Guy in panel 22, William in panel 42, and Odo in \
panel \
158 (click "toggle screen" to see this last figure). Grape (1994, 27) \
gives several Continental examples of this style of dress and cites \
Dijon MS 14, f. 44 v and f. 191 (seen here). Another representation \
in Dijon 14 may be found on f. 13.
\
\
Collection Bibliothèque municipale de Dijon, Ms. 14, f. 191, \
cliché F. Perrodin. Reproduced by permission.
Detail of Tapestry showing the fall of a figure, possibly Harold \ from panel 169). Bernstein \ (1986, 148-152) notes six apparent stitch holes leading from the \ brow of this figure, and seventeen holes visible from the back side \ of the Tapestry (click "toggle screen" to see). Bernstein discusses \ the possibility that these holes may represent a second arrow \ protruding from a second representation of Harold, or may be the \ addition of a later "inspired" restorer. Bernstein follows Wace\'s \ twelfth-century history (Library: Wace (¶140)), and his \ account of the death of Harold to argue for the former. Wace, who \ likely based on observation of the Tapestry, that before his death, \ Harold attempted to pull the arrow out of his eye, but only \ succeeded in breaking off the shaft.
\Wilson (1985, 194), disputes the \ legitimacy of the above-mentioned stitch holes. Wilson notes that \ as no eighteenth and nineteenth-century facsimiles show an \ awareness of such obvious marks (particularly Charles Stothard, who \ was an acute observer of stitch-holes and based much of his \ reconstructions upon them), they must be must be a \ nineteenth-century fabrication.
\
\
\
Published with special permission of the City of Bayeux, Normandy, \
France.
Jan Messent\'s reconstructed end of the Bayeux Tapestry
\In 1997 Jan Messent finished embroidering a commissioned \
reconstruction of the missing end of the Tapestry for Madeira \
Threads. Messent appears to draw chiefly upon one historical \
source, version D of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Library: Anglo-Saxon \
Chronicle (¦7-8)). Her eight foot conclusion \
to the Tapestry, however, includes versions of the two details \
commonly thought to have been present in the textile -- the \
surrender of Anglo-Saxon nobility in London to William, and the \
duke\'s coronation as king. Though any number of details in \
Messent\'s work could be quibbled with -- the dependence on an \
Anglo-Saxon and not a Norman source, the lack of the iconic \
representation of the city of London in submission, or the failure \
to name Archbishop Stigand in the group of nobles who surrender, \
for instance -- its stylistic consonance with the rest of the work \
leaves it hard to dispute that her work stands as a studied and \
very fair "best guess" at the contents of the Tapestry\'s end within \
the statistically determined missing length (see Glossary: The End of \
the Tapestry). Foys (2003, forthcoming) discusses \
the accuracy and hermeneutic implications of creating such an \
ending; for the creator\'s own account of the manufacture of this \
end, see Messent (1999, 72-77).
\
Toggle screen to see the extant end of the Tapestry.
\
\
Reproduced by permission of Madeira Threads.
 |
| This edition |
| Origin |
| Dating |
| Manufacture |
| Purpose |
| History |
| Restorations |
| Facsimiles |
|
Notes: Wace\'s Roman de Rou
\ \1. For a discussion of Norman accounts that Edward had \ previously promised the throne to William, see Walker \ (1997, 38-39).
\ \2. Harold\'s mother, Gytha, was sister-in-law to Cnut by marriage \ of her brother Ulf Jarl to Cnut\'s sister, Estrith.
\ \3. Wace refers to the legend that Harold\'s father, Earl Godwin , died \ at dinner with King Edward after swearing on his life that he had \ not been involved in the murder of Edward\'s brother, Alfred, in \ 1036.
\Wace refers to Wulfnoth and Hakon, \ members of the Godwin family, who were sent to Normandy as hostages \ following the Godwins\' brief exile in 1051-1052.
\ \4. Cf. the ambiguous nature of Edward and Harold\'s \ meeting in panel 1.
\ \5. Cf. panels 6 - 8.
\ \6. Cf. panel 13.
\ \ \ \ \ \9. Cf. panel 23 and panels 30 - 31.
\ \10. For Harold as William\'s guest, see panels 37 - 39. For \ Harold in Brittany, see Glossary: William\'s Breton \ Campaign.
\ \11. For Harold\'s possible betrothal, see panel 39.
\ \12. Cf. panel 59.
\ \13. Cf. panels 61 - 62.
\ \14. Cf. panels 70 - 71.
\ \15. Cf. panels 66 - 69.
\ \16. Cf. panel 72.
\ \17. Taylor (1975, 95, n. 3) \ identifies this as the park of Quevilly.
\ \18. I.e William fitz Osbern (see below). William fitz Osbern was \ the son of Osbern of Crepon, steward of Normandy himself, and Emma, \ daughter of Raoul, count of Ivry. He was also a cousin of Duke \ William, who made him earl of Hereford shortly after the \ Conquest.
\ \19. Taylor (1975, 98, n. 3) \ mistakenly prints "Easter."
\ \20. Cf. panel 80. Robert of Eu was the son of \ William of Eu and brother of Hugh, bishop of Lisieux; Roger II of \ Montgomery was vicomte of the Hiémois. William fitz Osbern \ is described above, note 18; Walter Giffard was the count of \ Longueville. For more information on Robert, count of Mortain, \ half-brother of Duke William and one of the largest post-Conquest \ landholders in England, and his appearance in the Tapestry, see \ Glossary: \ Count Robert of Mortain; for more on Bishop Odo, \ half-brother of William and the probable patron of the Tapestry, \ see Glossary: \ Odo.
\ \21. Roger of Beaumont was the son of Humphrey of Vielles, though \ was most likely not of such advanced age as Wace reports, as he \ lived for thirty years after the Conquest. His son Robert \ eventually became earl of Leicester; that William had a sister \ named Muriel is doubtful -- see Taylor (1975, 102, n. 6) for \ possible identification. Taylor also identifies Iwun-al-Chapel as \ Eudo de Capello, son of Turstan Halduc, head of the house at \ Haie-du-Puits and dapifer to Duke William.
\ \22. For reports of this council, see panel 80.
\ \23. See Library: \ Ship List of William the Conqueror for another \ account of ships and soldiers provided by William\'s nobles.
\ \24. Taylor (1975, 109, n. 10) \ identifies the location as St. Germer, near Gournay. At this time, \ the king of France, Philip I, was a minor under the regency of \ Baldwin V of Flanders.
\ \25. I.e. Baldwin V of Flanders (see above note).
\ \26. On the possible (but dubious) representation of Pope \ Alexander II\'s papal banner in the Tapestry, see panel 98 and \ Glossary: \ Banners .
\ \27. Cf. panel 75.
\ \28. Cf. panels 81 - 88.
\ \29. Aimeri, vicomte of Thouars, a Poitevin; Alan IV (Fergant), \ count of Brittany; Ralph of Gael, later earl of Norfolk.
\ \30. This reference to a magic fountain also appears in \ Chrétien de Troyes\' romance Yvain.
\ \31. Gillmor (1996, 114-15) \
examines all accounts of the Norman fleet and finds Wace\'s count of \
696 to be the most probable. William of Jumièges (¶6) \
numbers the size of William\'s fleet at 3,000. See also Glossary: Norman \
Shipbuilding.
\
\
-----
32. William\'s force assembled in Dives-sur-Mer by early August of 1066, \ waited for a month, and then sailed north along the coast to \ St. \ Valery, where it waited for about fifteen days for \ opportune winds, and possibly news of Harold\'s movements against \ Tostig and Harold Hardrada in the north of England. On the waiting \ period of William\'s fleet, cf. Glossary: Channel \ Crossing .
\ \33. For William\'s flagship, and possible depictions of a mast \ lantern and figurehead, see panel 98.
\ \34. William\'s fleet landed near Pevensey on September 28 or 29; \ cf. panels 102 - 104.
\ \35. Cf. panels 114 - 117 for the construction \ of fortifications.
\ \36. Cf. panels 109 - 112.
\ \37. A number of later accounts record the unlikely detail that \ William destroyed his fleet upon landing (see also the Battle Abbey \ Chronicle (¶3) and the Hyde \ Chronicle (¶9). Taylor \ (1975, 130, n. 1) surmises that the idea could have arisen from the \ Tapestry\'s representation of the unstepping of masts upon landing \ in panel \ 103.
\ \38. Cf. panels 104 - 109.
\ \39. Wace here refers to Tostig and King Harald Hardrada of \ Norway\'s invasion of England. On September 20, Tostig and Hardrada \ defeated the forces of Earl Morcar and Edwin, and occupied York. \ Harold defeated the combined forces of his brother Tostig and \ Hardrada at the Battle of Stamford Bridge on September \ 25, 1066. For some of the accounts of this battle, see William of \ Malmesbury (¶4) and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \40. William of \ Poitiers (¶27) names this figure as Robert of \ Guimar, or Robert fitz Wimarch, a Breton or Norman in Essex from \ the 1050s. See Chibnall (1998, 116, n. 3). \ Walker (1997, 167) notes \ Robert of Hastings, listed in Domesday Book as holding land in \ Sussex for Fécamp Abbey, as the probable identity of this \ figure.
\ \41. 60,000 troops is a considerably exaggerated number, more \ even than William of \ Poitiers (¶13), who gives the number of 50,000; \ \ Bachrach (1986, 2-3) reviews the evidence and calculates \ the total number of the Norman force to be about 14,000.
\ \42. Wace is the only source to name this monk.
\ \43. Margot\'s speech circumvents Harold\'s tenuous connection to \ the royal family through the marriage of his sister, Queen \ Edith, to King Edward.
\ \44. I.e. Harold\'s brother Wulfnoth and nephew Hakon, who were \ hostages of William\'s as a result of the brief exile of the Godwin \ family in 1051. William of Poitiers (¶9) and \ Eadmer of \ Canterbury (¶6) report that Hakon returned with \ Harold when he left Normandy. Wulfnoth returned to England after \ the Conquest, but died in Winchester in 1094, still a prisoner.
\ \45. A variant, possibly corrupt, version of this encounter \ between Gyrth and Harold portrays the king\'s \ thanes as already suspicious of his courage. See Library: Hyde Chronicle \ (¶9).
\ \46. Cf. the beginning of The Chronicle of Battle \ Abbey.
\ \47. Again, for a possible analogue to this altercation, see the \ Hyde Chronicle \ (¶9).
\ \48. For English scouts in the Tapestry, see panels 132 - \ 133.
\ \49. Cf. William of Malmesbury \ (¶12).
\ \50. Such an offer is dubious. In essence, William here would \ have been offering Harold his brother\'s Tostig\'s former lands (now \ ruled by Earl Morcar), and offering Gyrth the lands of Wessex, \ formerly held by his father Godwin and now held by his brother King \ Harold.
\ \51. Some of Wace\'s Old English is obscure, though most of the \ examples appear to be variations on wassail, \ drink-hail, and drink-to-me. See Taylor \ (1975, 156, n. 1) for a discussion.
\ \52. The Battle of Hastings took place on Saturday, October 14, \ 1066.
\ \53. Geoffrey of Mowbray, the bishop of Coutances; cf. \ William of \ Poitiers (¶33). For Odo, bishop of Bayeux, \ half-brother of William and probable patron of the Tapestry, see \ Glossary: \ Odo .
\ \54. The Ship List \ of William the Conqueror (¶1) lists Odo as \ providing 100 ships to William for the invasion.
\ \55. The last phrase, "Hail to the Holy Mother," was often used \ in the introit of masses dedicated to Mary, and Wace here \ probably refers to the contemporary practice of assigning a special \ mass to the devotion of Mary on Saturdays, noted, for instance, in \ the Leofric Missal.
\ \56. Cf. panel 134.
\ \57. Wace refers to King Æthelræd II\'s order on St. \ Brice Day (November 13), 1002 that all Danes living in England \ should be killed.
\ \58. Wace alludes to the legend that Harold\'s father, Earl \ Godwin, played an explicit role in the murder of Alfred \ Atheling, Edward\'s brother, upon his return from exile in \ Normandy in 1036. Alfred and his men were intercepted upon landing \ and taken to Guilford, where most of the party were killed. Alfred \ was taken to Ely and died there soon thereafter. See Barlow \ (1979, 45-46).
\ \59.Cf. William of \ Poitiers (¶33) and The Chronicle of Battle \ Abbey (¶3).
\ \60. See panels 120 - 121.
\ \61. I.e Aimeri, the Poitevin vicomte of Thouars.
\ \62. Ralph III of Tosny ("Conches"), who was also active with \ William against the king of France in 1054, also the son of Roger \ of Tosny and the hereditary standard bearer of Normandy.
\ \63. Thurstan ("Tostiens" in Wace) fitz Rou (Rollo) also appears \ in Orderic \ Vitalis (¶14). See also Chibnall (1968, 172, n. 4). \ Taylor (1975, 171, n. 7) \ identifies Wace\'s "Bec-en-Caux" as Bec-aux-Cauchois, in the region \ of Ivetot.
\ \64. Roger II of Montgomery, vicomte of the Hiémois.
\ \65. Alan IV (Fergant), count of Brittany; Aimeri, vicomte of \ Thouars.
\ \66. Cf. panels 135ff.
\ \67. In the Tapestry, archers support the initial Norman charge \ (see panel 141).
\ \68. Though most of Wace\'s unique orthography of Anglo-Saxon \ geography can be traced, "Bed" remains unknown, unless it is a \ repeat of Bedford, or perhaps Bayford.
\ \69. For a representation of the Anglo-Saxon shield wall, see \ panels \ 145 - 146.
\ \70. Pace Brown (1981, 20), Wace\'s \ description of these ramparts may be an elaboration of the defenses \ suggested by the description of the malfosse incident found \ in other late sources. For a discussion of the malfosse, and \ arguments that it is also represented in the Tapestry, see \ panel \ 157.
\ \71. For Harold\'s standard, see panel 168.
\ \72. For Gyrth and Leofwine in the Tapestry, see \ panels \ 150 - 151.
\ \73. Harold\'s army was likely closer to 7,000 in number. See \ Bachrach (1986, 2-3).
\ \74. I.e. the papal banner from Pope Alexander II.
\ \75. For other accounts of Tallifer, see Carmen de Hastingae \ Proelio (¶22), Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶6), and Geoffrey Gaimar (¶5).
\ \76. Cf. panel 144 for the first clash of \ Normans and English.
\ \77. On the fosse, see note 70, above.
\ \78. Cf. Bishop Odo of Bayeux rallying the \ troops in panel 158.
\ \79. In the later parts of the Tapestry\'s depiction of the Battle \ of Hastings, the archers make a second appearance, and occupy the \ space of the lower border for a good number of panels. Strikingly, \ these border figures begin by aiming low, and then gradually shift \ to aiming higher into the air. See panels 164 - 165. This strategy is \ also noted in Henry of Huntingdon\'s account (Library: \ Huntingdon (¦6)).
\ \80. Possibly a variant of wibel, Old English for weevil, \ suggesting the arrows were thick as insects.
\ \81. Cf. panel 169.
\ \82. Wace here lists the achievements of dozens of Norman and \ French nobility, most of them minor. For a full list and discussion \ of these figures, see Taylor (1975, 206-246).
\ \83. Cf. panel 160.
\ \84. Compare to the representation of the dead in the borders of \ the Tapestry as the battle rages on: panels 144ff.
\ \85. On Harold\'s last stand around his battle standard and death, \ see panels 168 - 169.
\ \86. On Gyrth\'s death, see panel 150.
\ \87. Cf. panels 172 - 173.
\ \88. Earlier sources report that William refused to allow Harold \ to be buried. Waltham Abbey had been heavily supported by Harold, \ and may have given rise to a tradition of his burial there. See \ Walker (1997, 181).
\ \89. Cf. William of Poitiers (¶49); \ according to Poitiers, two of William\'s ships had accidentally \ landed at Romney, where they were overcome by local militia.
\ \90. Wace\'s report of a siege at Dover is doubtful -- earlier \ accounts do not record it; within two weeks of his victory at \ Hastings, William attacked Romney, and then won Dover and \ Canterbury, apparently without serious opposition. By mid-December \ he had cut London off from the rest of England and soon after was \ able to enter the city with little or no resistance. See \ Douglas (1964, 396-400) for \ a chronology of the events after Hastings.
\ \91. On Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury, see Glossary: \ Stigand .
\ \92. I.e. Earls Edwin and Morcar, sons of Ælfgar; Edgar \ Atheling, son of Edward the exile, grandson of Edmund Ironside, \ great-grandson of Æthelræd II (the Unready). In 1066, \ Edgar would have been around fifteen years of age.
\ \93. It is somewhat doubtful that any serious opposition to \ William issued from London, though William of Jumièges (¶8) \ notes some initial resistance. William took his time with regards \ to the city. His forces actually circled around the city, first \ moving through territory to the north of London. William approached \ London by the middle of December; the Normans likely entered the \ city with little serious opposition soon after, as most of the \ surviving English nobles, including Edgar Atheling, and the \ citizens of London, had already submitted to William at \ Berkhamstead, to the northwest of London, in early December. See \ the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶7, version D), William of \ Poitiers (¶51) and Douglas \ (1964, 205-207). See, however, note 94, below, for a variation on \ the submission of the English nobles.
\ \94. Cf. Orderic Vitalis (¶21), and also \ William of \ Poitiers (¶51), who notes that Stigand came to \ William at Wallingford.
\ \95. William was crowned King of England on Christmas Day, \ 1066.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Regrettably, no recent English edition of the Roman de \ Rou exists. A.J. Holdon\'s 1970 edition in French is the most \ comprehensive, while Lepelley\'s 1987 work translates passages of \ the Rou which deal specifically with William. Edgar Taylor\'s \ 1837 English edition, from which the present translation is \ adapted, is still surprisingly serviceable, though it occasionally \ suffers in its discussion of comparative literary sources.
\===================
\Bennet, M. "Poetry as History? The Roman De Rou of Wace as a \ Source for the Norman Conquest." Anglo-Norman Studies 5 \ (1983): 21-39.
\Eley, Penney and P.E. Bennett. "The Battle of Hastings According \ to Gaimar, Wace and Benoit: Rhetoric and Politics." Nottingham \ Medieval Studies 43 (1999): 47-78.
\Holdon, A.J., ed. Le Roman De Rou De Wace. 3 vols. Paris: \ Éditions A.&J. Picard, 1970.
\Lepelley, René, trans. Guillaume Le Duc, Guillaume Le \ Roi: Roman De Rou De Wace, Poète Normand Du Xiie \ Siècle. Caen: Centre d\'études normandes, 1987. \ This is a translation of various sections (about 1,250 verses) \ dealing with William the Conqueror from the work by Wace.
\Lim, Ilkyung Chung. "\'Truth\' and the Normans: Wace\'s Le Roman \ De Rou." Romance Languages Annual 8 (1996): 46-50.
\Taylor, Edgar, ed., trans. Master Wace, His Chronicle of the \ Norman Conquest from the Roman De Rou. London: Pickering, 1837. \ rpnt. 1975 (AMT Press).
'; var Waceabt='Excerpt from Wace\'s Roman de Rou ("Story of Rollo")
\Introduction:
\
Wace was born c. 1100 on the isle of Jersey. Given his early \
education at Caen, he was most likely of nobility. In 1135, he \
returned to Caen and became a clerc lisant (a "reader") to \
King Henry. Wace is most known for his Roman de Brut ("Story \
of Brutus"), completed c. 1155, a metrical adaptation in \
Anglo-Norman of Geoffrey of Monmouth\'s History of the Kings of \
Britain. Sometime after 1160, Wace became canon of Bayeux. \
While there, he continued his Anglo-Norman poem Roman de \
Rou, a history of Normandy from its founding by Rollo the \
Viking in the early 10th century to the reign of Robert Curthose \
(1106). Wace died c. 1174, with the Rou \
unfinished.
The Roman de Rou contains an extensive account of the \ Norman Conquest. Written four generations after the Battle of \ Hastings, much of Wace\'s material likely relies on oral traditions \ and begins to drift into fictive legend. Still, he also utilizes \ older Norman sources for information. Most importantly for this \ edition, Wace\'s account bears striking similarities to sections of \ the Tapestry; as canon of Bayeux, there is a good possibility that \ Wace consulted the Tapestry for his own writing (see Bennet (1983, \ 23)).
\The version here is adapted from Edgar Taylor\'s 1837 translation \
of the Anglo-Norman (Taylor (1975, 63-269)).
1. Hollister (1978, \ passim) provides a good amount of information about each of \ the figures listed in the list.
\William fitz Osbern was the son of Osbern of Crepon, steward of \ Normandy himself, and Emma, daughter of Raoul, count of Ivry. He \ was also a cousin of Duke William, who made him earl of Hereford \ shortly after the Conquest.
\ \2. I.e. Hugh of Avranches, who became earl of Chester c. \ early 1071.
\ \3. Hugh II, the vicomte of Montfort; Van \ Houts (1988, 167) notes, among other details, \ that Remigius was granted the see of Dorchester, the first see \ vacant after the Conquest, in repayment for his earlier \ support.
\ \4. Nicholas was also a cousin to Duke William.
\ \5. Robert of Eu was the son of William of Eu and brother of \ Hugh, bishop of Lisieux. For possible identifications of Fulk \ d\'Aunou, see Van Houts (1988, 169, n. \ 53)).
\ \6. William, count of Evreux, did not actually succeed his father \ Richard until December 13, 1067 (see Van \ Houts (1988, 169)).
\ \7.Roger II of Montgomery, vicomte of the Hiémois; Roger \ of Beaumont, son of Humphrey of Vielles; Bishop Odo of \ Bayeux , uterine brother of Duke William and the \ probable patron of the Tapestry.
\ \8. Walter Giffard, count of Longueville, is also listed by \ William Poitiers as one of the heroes of Hastings (see Library: William of \ Poitiers (¶41)).
\Count \ Robert of Mortain was the half-brother of Duke \ William and one of the largest post-Conquest landholders in \ England.
\ \9. The list\'s addition is faulty here; the "Ship List" totals \ 776 ships (777, if one counts the Mora, below), plus 280 \ milites, not 1,000.
\Van \ Houts (1988, 166) calls attention to the \ contrast in the sentence between ships owed to William and those \ given beyond that figure according to a supporter\'s means. She \ additionally (169-170) raises the possibility that the "Ship List" \ may be incomplete. See also Glossary: Norman \ Shipbuilding.
\ \10. Van \ Houts (1988, 172-173) notes that Orderic Vitalis \ gives the name of the ducal ship\'s captain as Stephen, son of \ Airard. She tentatively identifies this figure as being in the \ service of Matilda before the Conquest, and views this evidence, if \ correct, as support for the idea that Matilda provided the \ ship.
\For a detail of the Tapestry closely matching the description of \ the golden child, see William\'s flagship in panel 98. See also \ Library: \ Wace (¶47).
\ \11. The list is again inaccurate; William did not grant Matilda \ the earldom of Kent, but his half-brother Bishop Odo of \ Bayeux. Van Houts (1988, 173-174) \ posits that the "Ship List" perhaps references an early promise \ that either William later was unable to fulfill, or that Matilda, \ pregnant with Adele, was unable to accept.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Elisabeth Van Houts\' 1988 edition is the most recent; it \ supercedes Giles\' treatment of the list as an appendix to the \ Brevis Relatio, and contains a thorough discussion of its \ contents, manuscript history, and dating, as well as a facsimile of \ the manuscript page. See also Freeman\'s lengthy description of the \ text.
\The "Ship List" is found in a single manuscript: Bodleian MS E \ Museo 93, f. 8v. This manuscript also contains the Brevis \ Relatio.
\===================
\Freeman, E.A. History of the Norman Conquest. Oxford: \ Clarendon Press. 2nd ed. 1875, iii, 380-383.
\Giles, J.A. ed. Scriptores Rerum Gestarum Willelmi \ Conquestoris. London: Caxton Society, 1845, iii, 21-22.
\Hollister, C. Warren. "The Greater Domesday Tenants-in-Chief." \ Domesday Studies. Ed. J.C. Holt. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1987. \ 219-48.
\Körner, Sten. The Battle of Hastings, England and Europe \ 1035-1066. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1964, 151-153.
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M.C. "The Ship List of William the \ Conqueror." Anglo-Norman Studies 10 (1988), 159-184.
'; var Shipabt='"The Ship List of William the Conqueror"
\Introduction:
\
The "Ship List of William the Conqueror" survives in a late \
twelfth-century manuscript which also contains the Brevis \
Relatio and was removed from a larger work which originated in \
Battle Abbey (Van Houts (1988, 164-165)). Though Van Houts notes \
that the Latin list was copied as late as ca. 1130-1160, she \
argues for dating its composition between 1067-1072. She also \
corrects the assumption that the "Ship List" is simply an appendix \
to the Brevis Relatio, showing through manuscript context \
that this work was written in a different scribal hand, and that a \
later twelfth-century charter is in between the two works.
Translation by Martin K. Foys, from the edition by Van Houts (1988, \ 175-179).
'; var Poitnot='Notes: William of Poitiers\' Gesta Guillelmi
\ \1. The excerpt begins in roughly 1064. Poitiers records earlier \ (see Chibnall (1998, 19-21)) \ that Edward, shortly after his accession to the English throne in \ 1042, had sent the Norman bishop of Canterbury, Robert of \ Jumièges, to William to recognize the duke as heir to \ England as an expression of power and gratitude.
\ \2. For this meeting between Harold and Edward, see panel 1.
\
Eadmer of \
Canterbury (¶3), among others, records that \
Harold\'s brother Wulfnoth and nephew Hakon \
were hostages of William\'s as a result of the brief exile of the \
Godwin family in 1051. Wulfnoth returned to England after the \
Conquest, but died in Winchester in 1094, still a prisoner.
\
-----
3. Cf. panels 13 - 17.
\ \4. Cf. panels 22 - 28.
\ \5. Cf. panels 37 - 39.
\ \6. Cf. panel 59. Poitiers places the oath \ scene before the Breton campaign and at Bonneville; the Tapestry \ depicts Harold\'s oath after the campaign and at Bayeux.
\Though in 1064 the king would have been in his late fifties or \ early sixties, contemporary accounts of Edward do not show him to \ be ill before November of 1066. His illness appears to have been \ quite sudden; Barlow (1979, 240) conjectures that \ Edward suffered a series of strokes.
\ \7. Cf. panels 40 - 55.
\ \8. Count \ Conan II of Brittany, son of Alan III.
\For a full discussion of William\'s military action against \ Conan, see Glossary: William\'s Breton \ Campaign.
\ \9. Chibnall (1998, 73, n. 6)) \ notes that "Count Alan III\'s father, Geoffrey of Rennes, count of \ Brittany, married Hawise, daughter of Duke Richard I of \ Normandy; and Duke Richard II of Normandy married \ as his first wife Judith of Brittany, sister of Count \ Geoffrey."
\ \10. Cf. panel 46. Poitiers\' account differs \ from the Tapestry\'s in that the textile shows Conan not laying \ seige to Dol but fleeing from inside Dol\'s \ fortress by means of a rope.
\ \11. Cf. Glossary: Rivallon of \ Cambour , lord of Dol.
\ \12. Contrast panel 52, where the Tapestry apparently \ shows Conan surrendering to William at Dinan, \ another Breton city. Barlow (2002, 71) guesses that Poitiers \ cuts the account of the campaign at Dol short to minimize Harold\'s \ participation in it.
\ \13. i.e. Hakon.
\ \14. Cf. panels 61 - 62.
\ \15. Poitiers here digresses to expound upon William\'s piety and \ his good deeds, appointments, and supporters at some length.
\ \16. Cf. panels 78 - 79.
\ \17. Cf. panels 70 - 72. Most sources set \ Edward\'s death on the eve of the Epiphany (January 5), and his \ burial the next day, though the Vita Ædwardi records the \ date of Edward\'s death as January 4, 1066. See Barlow \ (1992, 124, n. 329) for a discussion of the dating. See also \ Glossary: \ Death of Edward.
\ \18. Cf. panel 72. Poitiers\' identification of \ Stigand as the sole consecrator accords \ with the Tapestry\'s representation.
\ \19 Cf. panel 80.
\ \20. Both Chibnall (1998, 101-102) \ and Hollister (1978, \ passim) provide a good amount of information on most of \ these figures. All of them (with the exception of Richard, who is \ replaced by his son William) also appear in The Ship List of William the \ Conqueror .
\William fitz Osbern was the son of Osbern of Crepon, steward of \ Normandy himself, and Emma, daughter of Raoul, count of Ivry. He \ was also a cousin of Duke William, who made him earl of Hereford \ shortly after the Conquest. Hugh II was the vicomte of Montfort. \ For more information on Robert, count of Mortain, half-brother of \ Duke William and one of the largest post-Conquest landholders in \ England, and his appearance in the Tapestry, see Glossary: Count Robert \ of Mortain. Robert of Eu was the son of William of \ Eu and brother of Hugh, bishop of Lisieux. Roger of Beaumont was \ the son of Humphrey of Vielles, while Roger II of Montgomery was \ vicomte of the Hiémois.
\ \21. Eccls. 43:37
\ \22. See, however, panels 81 - 93.
\ \23. 50,000 troops is too high a figure; Bachrach (1986, 2-3) \ reviews the evidence and calculates the total number of the Norman \ force to be about 14,000. For a full discussion of the military \ preparations and the timeframe involved, see Glossary: Channel \ Crossing.
\ \24. On the possible (but dubious) representation of Pope \ Alexander II\'s papal banner in the Tapestry, see panel 98 and \ Glossary: \ Banners .
\ \25. Swein II Estrithson, king of Denmark, was the son of King \ Cnut of England\'s sister Estrith. In 1069, he launched his own \ invasion of England.
\ \26. See Brown (1985, 23ff.) and \ panels 77 \ - 80 for the argument that the Tapestry depicts such spies.
\ \27. See Glossary: Norman Shipbuilding and \ Gillmor (1996, 114-15) for a \ discussion of the logistics of William\'s ship-building program.
\ \28. William\'s force assembled in Dives-sur-Mer by early August of 1066, \ waited for a month, and then sailed north along the coast to \ St. \ Valery, where it waited for about fifteen days for \ opportune winds, and possibly news of Harold\'s movements against \ Tostig and Harold Hardrada in the north of England. See also \ Glossary: \ The Norman Channel-Crossing.
\ \29. Cf. panels 88 - 94.
\ \30. Cf. panel 98, where William\'s flagship \ depicts a boy with a trumpet and possibly a lantern on the \ flagship\'s mast.
\ \31. Poitiers\' figure of ships is exaggerated. Gillmor \ (1996, 114-15) examines all accounts of the Norman fleet and \ calculates that the fleet numbered somewhere around 700 \ vessels.
\ \32. Cf. panels 102 - 104. Sources variously \ report that William landed at Pevensey on either September 28 or \ September 29.
\ \33. Harold defeated the combined forces of his brother Tostig \ and King Harald Hardrada of Norway at the Battle of Stamford \ Bridge on September 25, 1066. For accounts of this \ battle, see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶3),William of \ Malmesbury (¶4), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \34. I.e. Queen Edith, Harold and Tostig\'s sister \ and the wife of King Edward.
\ \35. Cf. panels 114 - 117 for the construction \ of fortifications.
\ \36. For Norman scouting parties after landing, see panels 104 - \ 109.
\ \37. Robert of Guimar, or Robert fitz Wimarch, a Breton or Norman \ in Essex from the 1050s. See Chibnall (1998, 116, n. 3). \ Walker (1997, 167) notes Robert of \ Hastings, listed in the Domesday Book as holding land in Sussex for \ Fécamp Abbey, as the probable identity of this figure.
\ \38. Poitiers again rhetorically exaggerates the more probable \ number of 14,000 troops.
\ \39. For Edward\'s deathbed scene and promises to Harold, see \ panel 70 \ or Glossary: Death of Edward.
\ \40. William\'s response denies the validity and effect of \ Harold\'s claim to the throne through Edward\'s deathbed promise.
\ \41. Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury; \ Godwin, \ earl of Wessex and Harold\'s father; Leofric, earl of Mercia (d. \ 1057); Siward, earl of Northumbria (d. 1055). Contrary to English \ accounts (cf. Library: Eadmer (¶2)), \ Poitiers here claims that Hakon and Wulfnoth were not \ hostages sent as a part of the Godwin family\'s exile and return in \ 1051, but as part of Edward\'s promise to William.
\ \42. Poitiers here summarizes what is also the first third of the \ Tapestry\'s narrative.
\ \43. For Norman scouts reporting to William before the battle, \ see panel 130. For a depiction of \ William\'s ravaging of lands in Sussex, see panel 118.
\ \44. Odo , the half-brother of \ William, makes several appearances in the Tapestry, of which he was \ the probable patron.
\For the legend of the backwards hauberk, see also Wace (¶102) \ and The Chronicle \ of Battle Abbey (¶3).
\ \45. Cf. panel 134.
\ \46. There is no other record that Danish troops fought with the \ English at Hastings. Barlow (2002, 101) wonders if Poitiers \ is here thinking of Harold\'s huscarls, but notes that \ Orderic Vitalis claims that Swegen of Denmark\'s 1069 invasion \ occured partly to avenge the loss of his men in Harold\'s \ war.
\The battle hill, now the site of Battle Abbey. Contrast the \ Tapestry\'s depiction of a mounted charge (panels 140 - \ 144).
\ \47. E.g. panel 144.
\ \48. Cf. panel 160.
\ \49. Poitiers demonstrates the range of regions from which \ William has culled his forces -- regions which, for the most part, \ William had also previously conquered or subdued.
\ \50. As Chibnall (1998, 131, n. 6)) \ notes, Robert of Beaumont later received extensive lands in \ England, and was made the earl of Leicester by Henry I.
\ \51. In the later parts of the Tapestry\'s depiction of the Battle \ of Hastings, the archers make a second appearance, and occupy the \ space of the lower border for a good number of panels. See \ panels \ 159ff.
\ \52. For Eustace II, count of Boulogne, see Glossary: Count Eustace II \ of Boulogne and panel 161. William of Évreux \ succeeded to the county in 1067 and appears in William\'s Ship \ List . See Chibnall (1998, 134-135) \ for discussions on the lesser known of the so-called "companions of \ the Conqueror."
\ \53. For Harold\'s death, see panel 169 or Glossary: Death of \ Harold ; for the deaths of his brothers Gyrth \ and Leofwine, see panels 150 - \ 151.
\ \54. Cf. panels 171 - 173.
\ \55. Eustace comes off rather poorly in Poitiers\' account, \ perhaps because of his subsequent invasion of Dover \ in 1067. For Eustace II, count of Boulogne\'s possible depiction in \ the Tapestry, see Glossary: Count Eustace II of \ Boulogne, and panel 161.
\ \56. Harold\'s mother, Gytha, was of Danish origins and withdrew \ from England in 1069, settling in Flanders. See Walker \ (1997, 192-193). On William Malet, see Chibnall (1998, 140, n. \ 2).
\ \57. I.e. Tostig, killed at the Battle of Stamford Bridge.
\ \58. Cf. Harold\'s coronation in panel 72 and Halley\'s \ comet in panel 75.
\ \59. This place has not been identified; see Chibnall (1998, 145, n. \ 2).
\ \60. The sons of Ælfgar were Edwin and Morcar, earls of \ Mercia and Northumbria, respectively. Harold fought with them \ against Tostig in the north, and was married to their sister, \ Edith.
\ \61. Edgar Atheling, son of Edward the exile, grandson of Edmund \ Ironside, great-grandson of Æthelræd II (the \ Unready). In 1066, Edgar would have been around fifteen years of \ age.
\ \62. Ealdred, archbishop of York, reported in some accounts also \ to have coronated Harold.
\ \63. I.e. Geoffrey of Coutances, mentioned above with Bishop \
Odo.
\
.
Bibliography:
\The Gesta Guillelmi survives only in André \ Duchesne\'s 1619 edition, which is based on a manuscript believed to \ have been destroyed in the 1731 fire at the Cotton Library. As \ Orderic Vitalis relied heavily on Poitiers for relevant sections of \ his own writings, the small gaps found in the Duchesne\'s text may \ be reconstructed. Evidence points to the existence of a second MS \ of the Gesta on the Continent, but if it survives, it has \ yet to be discovered.
\Chibnall and Davis\'s 1998 edition and translation supercedes \ Raymonde Foreville\'s 1952 French edition. Lewis Thorpe includes a \ discussion of Poitiers and relevant sections of the Gesta in \ his 1973 edition of the Bayeux Tapestry. Drögeriet argues \ through a scene-by-scene comparison of the Tapestry and Poitiers\' \ account that the Gesta Guillelmi served as the source for \ the content of the Tapestry.
\===================
\Chibnall, Marjorie and R.H.C. Davis, eds. The Gesta Guillelmi \ of William of Poitiers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
\Davis, R.H.C. "William of Poitiers and His History of William \ the Conqueror." The Writing of History in the Middle Ages: \ Essays Presented to Richard William Southern. Eds. R.H.C. Davis \ and J.M. Wallace-Hadrill. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1981. \ 71-100.
\Drögeriet, R. "Bermerkungen Zum Bayeux-Teppich." \ Mitteilungun des Istituts für österreichisch \ Geschichtsforschung 70 (1962): 257-93.
\Foreville, Raymonde, ed. William of Poitiers: Gesta \ Guillelmi Ducis Normannorum Et Regis Anglorum. Paris: \ Société d\'Edition \'Les belles Lettres\', 1952.
\Thorpe, Lewis. The Bayeux Tapestry and the Norman \ Invasion. London: The Folio Society, 1973.
'; var Poitabt='Excerpt from William of Poitiers\' Gesta Guillelmi Ducis \ Normannorum Et Regis Anglorum ("The deeds of William, duke of \ the Normans and king of the English")
\Introduction:
\
William of Poitiers, a Norman cleric born c. 1020, trained \
as a soldier in his youth before entering religious service. He \
eventually became archdeacon of Lisieux and one of William the \
Conqueror\'s chaplains, and died sometime after 1087. Under William, \
he most likely accompanied Norman forces on military expeditions to \
Anjou, Maine, and Brittany, though not to England. With what must \
have been extensive scholastic training at Poitiers, William became \
an accomplished Latinist, and his work blends classical images and \
allusions with eyewitness and oral accounts.
Composed ca. 1071-1077, the Gesta is unfinished, \ but in its surviving form continues until 1067; it also contains \ one of the most detailed descriptions of the Norman invasion and \ served as a major source for Orderic Vitalis\' version of the \ Conquest. Poitiers\' account especially emphasizes the military \ aspects of the Battle of Hastings.
\The version here is excerpted from Chibnall, Marjorie and R.H.C. \
Davis, eds. The Gesta Guillelmi of William of \
Poitiers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998, 69-153. © \
Marjorie Chibnall 1998, by permission of Oxford University \
Press.
Notes: Orderic Vitalis\' Historia Æcclesiastica
\ \1. Cf. panel 76.
\ \2. Robert of Jumièges, a Norman, was made archbishop of \ Canterbury by Edward in 1051, but forced into exile by Earl Godwin and his \ sons\' successful return to power in 1052. Notably, Robert was \ uncanonically replaced by Stigand. See Walker \ (1997, 37-38 and 50-51) for a discussion of Robert\'s role as \ Edward\'s messenger.
\ \3. Cf. panel 59 and panels 40 - 55. \ Orderic reverses the order of Harold\'s oath and his service in \ William\'s Breton campaign found in the \ Tapestry.
\ \4. Cf. panels 64 - 65.
\ \5. Most sources set Edward\'s death on the eve of the Epiphany \ (January 5), and his burial the next day, though the Vita \ Ædwardi (Library: Vita) records the date of \ Edward\'s death as January 4, 1066. See Barlow \ (1992, 124, n. 329) for a discussion of the dating. See also \ Glossary: \ Death of Edward.
\Cf. the hand of God above Westminster in panel 67.
\
-----
6. Cf. panel 72. Orderic\'s identification of \ Archbishop \ Stigand as the sole consecrator accords with the \ Tapestry\'s representation.
\ \7. As Chibnall (1969, 139-141) \ points out, Orderic\'s account of Tostig\'s role in the events of the \ Conquest is rife with inaccuracies and claims unreported elsewhere. \ Bleddyn was the half-brother, not the son, of Gruffydd; Tostig was \ not elder than Harold by birth; Tostig fled into exile during the \ Northumberland rebellion in 1065, before Edward\'s death and \ Harold\'s accession. Orderic\'s account of Tostig\'s visit to Normandy \ and pact with William is unsubstantiated elsewhere. Additionally, \ Edith, also known as Alditha, is not to be confused with Harold\'s \ first wife, Edith "Swan-neck." Harold likely married his second \ wife between August 1063 and 1066 (see Walker \ (1997, 116-117)).
\ \8. i.e. Harald Hardrada (not Harald Fairhair).
\ \9. Cf. panels 81 - 94.
\ \10. The Battle of Stamford Bridge occurred on \ September 25, 1066. Harold defeated the combined forces of his \ brother Tostig and King Harald Hardrada of Norway at this battle. \ For accounts of this battle, see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶3), William of \ Malmesbury (¶4), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \11. Orderic greatly exaggerates the number of Norman military \ involved. Bachrach (1986, 2-3) reviews the \ evidence and calculates the total number of the Norman force to be \ about 14,000, 8,000 of which would have been fielded at Hastings, \ and roughly a 2,000-3,000 of which were mounted troops.
\ \12. Cf. panels 94 - 109. Sources variously \ report that William landed at Pevensey on either September 28 or \ September 29. See also Glossary: The Norman \ Channel-Crossing.
\ \13. Cf. panels 121ff.
\ \14. Cf. panel 113.
\ \15. In mid-October, the sun rises in the south of England around \ 6:30 in the morning, placing the third hour (terce) at \ approximately 8:30 A.M.
\ \16. E.g. panels 145 - 146.
\Thurstan fitz Rou (Rollo) also appears in Wace (¶110). \ See also Chibnall (1968, 172, n. \ 4).
\ \17. Cf. panel 160.
\ \18. Count Eustace II of Boulogne is probably \ represented in the Tapestry, see panel 161.
\ \19. For Harold\'s death, see panel 169 or Glossary: Death of \ Harold. For the death of Leofwine, see panel 152.
\ \20. Cf. panels 172 - 173.
\ \21. Orderic\'s figure of casualties are somewhat inflated, as in \ all likelihood only 14,000 troops fought on both sides. The carnage \ was great, however; Wright (1996, 103) estimates some \ 6,000 human and 600 equine casualties, and calculates that on the \ ridge of the battle, there were "at least six human bodies and a \ horse for every yard of hill."
\Orderic here refers to King Edward\'s brother Alfred, who was \ slain when he returned to England in 1036 from exile in Normandy, \ and Harald Hardrada of Norway.
\ \22. Chibnall (1969, 178, n. 3) \ notes that no other source mentions a Godwinson named Ælfgar; \ however, a confused familial connection may have resulted from the \ fact that Harold\'s second wife, Alditha, was the daughter of earl \ Ælfgar of Mercia. Wulfnoth was sent as a \ hostage to Normandy in 1051 and died in Winchester in 1094, still a \ prisoner.
\ \23. Edward Atheling ("the Exile"), grandson of Æthelred \ II ("the Unready"), was never king of Hungary, \ though he did spend the majority of his life in exile there.
\ \24. William\'s coronation was on Christmas Day 1066. Orderic \ dates the new year from December 25 (i.e. Christmas style).
\ \25. See Library: \ William of Poitiers .
\ \26. See Library: \ Carmen de Hastingae Proelio .
\ \27. See John of Worcester\'s chronicle in Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle .
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Marjorie Chibnall\'s edition and translation of Orderic Vitalis\' \ Historia Æcclesiastica remains the authoritative \ treatment of the work. The text is derived from Bibl. Nat. MS Lat. \ 5506, a copy by the author.
\===================
\Chibnall, Marjorie, ed. Orderici Vitalis Historia \ Æcclesiastica. Vol. II. 6 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, \ 1969.
\_____. The World of Orderic Vitalis. Oxford: Oxford \ University Pres, 1984.
\_____. "Anglo-French Relations in the Work of Orderic Vitalis." \ Medieval History Presented to George Peddy Cuttino. Ed. J. \ S. and Patricia J. Bradley Hamilton. Wolfeboro: Boydell, 1989. \ 5-19.
\Ray, Roger S. "Orderic Vitalis and His Readers." Studia \ Monastica 14 (1972): 17-33.
'; var Ordabt='Excerpt from Orderic Vitalis\' Historia Æcclesiastica \ ("History of the Church")
\Introduction:
\Orderic Vitalis was born near Shewsbury, England, in 1075. The \ son of a Norman priest and probably an Englishwoman, he was placed \ by his father in the Norman monastery of St. Évroul. He \ began his Historia Æcclesiastica, a Latin history \ specifically concerned with the history of his monastery of St. \ Évroul, between 1109-1115. Book III, which contains his \ account of the Norman Conquest, is the earliest section of his \ extensive Historia, and was finished around 1124. His report \ of the Battle of Hastings borrows heavily from both William of \ Poitiers and William of Jumièges (whose account he also \ revised), but also shows evidence of other sources. Orderic\'s \ account of the events leading up to and including Hastings is \ substantively interrupted by an account of contemporary events at \ St. Évroul, here omitted.
\This excerpt is taken from Chibnall, Marjorie, ed. Orderici \ Vitalis Historia Æcclesiastica. Vol. II. 6 vols. Oxford: \ Clarendon Press, 1969, 135-145, 169-179. © Oxford University \ Press 1968, reproduced by permission of Oxford University \ Press.
'; var Montnot='Notes: Amato of Montecassino\'s L\'Ystoire de li \ Normant
\ \1. 100,000 troops is a considerably exaggerated number, more \ even than William of \ Poitiers (¶13), who gives the number of 50,000; \ Bachrach (1986, 2-3) \ reviews the evidence and calculates the total number of the Norman \ force to be about 14,000.
\ \2. For Harold\'s death in the Tapestry, and the subsequent flight \ of English troops, see panel 169. See also Glossary: Death of \ Harold.
\ \3. Most likely, Amato alludes to the suppressed English \ rebellion of 1075, in which Earl Roger of Hereford, Earl Ralph of \ Norfolk, and Earl Waltheof of Huntingdon plotted to overthrow \ William with Danish aid. The rebellion was quickly put down, and \ the Danes retired after incurring heavy losses during an initial \ raid on York. See Chibnall (1986, 36).
\ \4. Cf. panel 75.
\ \5. I.e. 1066.
\
\
.
Bibliography
\
======================================
Amato of Montecassino. L\'Ystoire de li Normant, et la \ Chronique de Robert Viscart. Ed. M. Champollion-Figeac. Paris: \ Jules Renouard, 1835.
\Amato of Montecassino. Storia dei Normanni volgarizzata in \ antico francese. Ed. V. De Bartholomaeis. Rome: Tipografia del \ Senato, 1935.
\Amato of Montecassino. Storia dei Normanni. Trans. \ Giuseppe Sperduti. Cassino [Frosinone]: F. Ciolfi, 1999.
'; var Montabt='Excerpt from Amato of Montecassino\'s L\'Ystoire de li \ Normant, sections III and IV
\Introduction:
\
Amato was a monk at the monastery of Montecassino in Norman Italy \
who wrote a history of the Normans sometime between 1080 and 1089. \
Though his reference to William, Harold, and the Battle of Hastings \
is brief, and exaggerated in detail, it is notable as an \
attestation that Harold was killed by an arrow in his eye that \
considerably predates other accounts of this detail (except, of \
course, possibly the Tapestry).
The version here is translated by Olivia Marancy-Ferrer and \
Martin K. Foys from the original Old French in Bartholomaeis \
(1935, 11-13).
Notes: William of Malmesbury\'s Gesta Regum Anglorum
\Notes concerning the sources which William of Malmesbury uses \ in his account follow Thomson and Winterbottom\'s commentary on \ Mynors\' edition (see Thomson (1998, 212 \ ff.)).
\ \-----
\1. This passage comes after a discussion of the visions of King \ Edward, drawn largely from a late redaction of the Vita \ Edwardi and a brief mention of Halley\'s comet.
\ \2. For Edward\'s deathbed scene, see panel 70. Both \ William of Malmesbury and his source, the Vita Ædwardi \ (see Library: \ Vita (¶1)) treat this dream as a critical \ commentary on the fall of the English from power, a premonition of \ the Norman Conquest by which, in the words of Malmesbury, "England \ has become a dwelling-place of foreigners and a playground for \ lord\'s of alien blood" (cf. Mynors \ (1998, 414-416)). Like the central narrative of the Tapestry, \ though, in the pro-Norman interpretative context of post-Conquest \ England, the healthy reunion of tree and sap easily could be read \ as a symbol of William\'s familial relation to Edward through \ Queen \ Emma-Ælfgifu and his successful restoration of their \ shared bloodline to the throne. See also Barlow \ (1992, 130-131) for a discussion of later readings of Edward\'s \ prophesy of the green tree. Thomson (1998, 212) notes that \ Malmesbury later views the birth of King William\'s son as the \ fulfillment of the deathbed prophecy.
\ \3. Malmesbury, following a version of the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle, traces Edward the Confessor\'s attempt to locate a \ suitable heir, including Edgar Atheling, who is mentioned in \ most accounts of the Conquest. In doing so, Malmesbury jumps to a \ point several years earlier in his chronology. On Edward\'s attempt \ to find an heir before William, see Walker (1997, 37-42).
\ \4. For Eustace II, count of Boulogne, see Glossary: Count Eustace \ II of Boulogne , and panel 161.
\ \5. Cf. panels 6 - 28. William somewhat follows \ Eadmer of Canterbury\'s account (Library: Eadmer (¶4-5), but \ notably adds the cover story of the fishing expedition and, like \ the Tapestry, identifies Bosham as the site of Harold\'s feasting \ (see panel \ 4). Cf. Hyde \ Chronicle (¶1), Henry of \ Huntingdon (¶1), and Glossary: Harold\'s \ Mission to Normandy.
\ \6. Cf. panels 30 - 39.
\ \7. Cf. panels 40 - 59. Malmesbury also notes \ in a later passage on William\'s expansionist policies in areas \ bordering Normandy (see Mynors (1998, 440-441)) that \ the Duke also used his Breton campaign both to test Harold\'s \ strength, and to impress upon Harold the military might of the \ Normans.
\ \8. Malmesbury notes below that this daughter of William had died \ by 1066. See Thomson (1998, 254) for a \ discussion of William\'s daughters.
\ \9. Cf. panels 66 - 70. Holy Innocents\' Day is \ December 28, 1065. Malmesbury avoids giving Edward\'s death day. \ Most sources set Edward\'s death on the eve of the Epiphany (January \ 5), 1066, and his burial the next day, though the Vita \ Ædwardi records the date of Edward\'s death \ as January 4. See Barlow (1992, 124, n. 329) \ for a discussion of the dating, as well as Glossary: Death of \ Edward.
\ \10. Cf. panels 70 - 72.
\ \11. i.e. Tostig Godwinson, Harold\'s brother and former earl of \ Northumbria; Edwin, earl of Mercia; Morcar, the current earl of \ Northumbria; and Harald Hardrada (not Harald Fairhair), the king of \ Norway. Like many other accounts, the text confuses the earlier \ Harald Harfagr ("fairhair") with the later Norwegian king Harald \ Hardrada. Edwin and Morcar\'s forces were defeated by Harald and \ Tostig\'s invasion force at the bloody battle of Fulford, about two \ miles south of York, on September 20. Upon their victory, Tostig \ and Harald Hardrada occupied York.
\ \12. The Battle of Stamford Bridge took place on \ September 25, 1066. At Stamford Bridge, Harold defeated the \ combined forces of his brother Tostig and King Harald Hardrada of \ Norway. For other accounts of this battle, see the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶3) and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \13. The first section of Book III concerns William\'s Norman \ background, specifically his rise to power and his various military \ campaigns in Normandy and surrounding regions, interspersed with a \ few anecdotes of local religious figures.
\ \14. Edgar Atheling, son of Edward the exile, grandson of Edmund \ Ironside, great-grandson of Æthelræd II (the \ Unready). In 1066, Edgar would have been around fifteen years of \ age.
\ \15. Cf. panels 76 - 80.
\ \16. Mynors\' edition here provides passages from two different \ manuscript traditions of Malmesbury\'s text. The first colored passage is from Malmesbury\'s \ original version, while the second colored \ passage, less acerbic in tone, comes from his later \ revisions of the Gesta.
\ \17. Cf. panel 80.
\ \18. I.e. the local saint for whom St Valery was named.
\ \19. Cf. panels 95 - 103.
\ \20. As Thomson (1998, 230) notes, \ only Malmesbury contains this anecdote, which "suspiciously \ parallels that of Julius Caesar\'s arrival in Africa as told in \ Suetonius."
\ \21. Contrast to the Tapestry, panels 104 - 118, where the Normans \ raid the countryside, build fortifications, and burn houses.
\ \22. I.e. the killing of his brother, Tostig.
\ \23. Cf. panel 132. For much of the following \ sections, Malmesbury appears to follow William of Poitiers\' \ account.
\For the scouts\' confusion of hairstyles, cf. Wace \ (¶80).
\ \24. For a representation of the Anglo-Saxon shield wall, see \ panels \ 145 - 146.
\ \25. As noted by Brooks (1978, 27-28) and \ Brown (1981, 18-21), the \ description of Anglo-Saxons defending a knoll matches a depiction \ in panel \ 157. Likewise, Malmesbury\'s description of Harold\'s death by arrow, \ here and in the next section, parallels the Tapestry\'s \ representation (see panels 169ff.). Both of these examples \ indicate that Malmesbury may have used the Tapestry as a \ source.
\ \26. Cf. panel 160.
\ \27. Compare to Stigand\'s coronation of Harold, panel 72.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\R.A.B. Mynors\' posthumous 1998 translation and edition (volume \
I), completed with commentary by R.M. Thomson and M. Winterbottom \
(volume II), is the first critical treatment of the Gesta \
Regum since 1854. The Gesta Regum survives in almost 40 \
manuscript witnesses, attesting variously to four stages of \
composition and revision. Mynors et alia present a conflated \
edition which attempts to print a text common to the later \
redactions, with acknowledgements to revisionary departures from \
early versions. For a full list of manuscripts and a discussion of \
compositional process and editorial strategy, see Mynors (1998, \
xiii-xxvi) and Thomson (1998, xvii-xxxv).
===================
\Brooks, N.P and H.E. Walker. "The Authority and Interpretation \ of the Bayeux Tapestry." The Proceedings of the Battle \ Conference I (1978): 1-34.
\Brown, R. Allen. "The Battle of Hastings." Proceedings of the \ Battle Conference, 1980. (1981): 1-21, 197-201.
\Giles, J.A. trans. William of Malmesbury\'s Chronicle of \ the Kings of England. London: George Bell and Sons, 1889.
\Haahr, Joan Gluckauf. "The Concept of Kingship in William of \ Malmesbury\'s Gesta Regum and Historia Novella." \ Mediaeval Studies 38 (1976): 351-71.
\Mynors, R.A.B. et alia, ed. and trans. William of \ Malmesbury\'s Gesta Regum Anglorum; a History of the English \ Kings. Vol. 1. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
\Sharpe, J., ed.and trans. The History of the Kings of England \ and the Modern History of William of Malmesbury. London: \ Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, 1815.
\Stevenson, J., ed. The Church Historians of England, \ Containing the History of the Kings of England and of His Own \ Times, by William of Malmesbury. Vol. iii Part I. London: \ Seeleys, 1854.
\Thomson, R.M. and M. Winterbottom, ed. William of \ Malmesbury\'s Gesta Regum Anglorum; a History of the English \ Kings. Vol. 2. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
'; var Malmabt='Excerpt from William of Malmesbury\'s Gesta Regum Anglorum \ ("The deeds of the kings of England")
\Introduction:
\William of Malmesbury completed his five part Latin history \ Gesta Regum Anglorum, commissioned by Queen Matilda, \ c. 1125, though he continued to revise the work for some \ years after, possibly until his death in the early 1140s. William \ was most likely born to a Norman father and an English mother close \ to Malmesbury, England, between 1087 and 1096. He spent his adult \ life as a monk at the monastery in Malmesbury. William\'s account of \ the Conquest draws from a wide variety of classical, scriptural, \ and contemporary sources. Though he is thought to be part Norman by \ birth, he is at times quite sympathetic to the English, going as \ far as to note that the English now stand dispossessed of their \ land and ruled by alien lords. At other points in the account, \ however, William favors the Norman views on the Conquest. As a \ later author drawing from several traditions, William tends to \ embellish the Gesta somewhat; still, his account also \ contains some details that can only be found elsewhere in the \ Tapestry.
\Additionally, sections of William\'s account of the Battle of \ Hastings closely match depictions found in the Tapestry, indicating \ that William may have used the textile as a source.
\This excerpt is taken from the edition and translation by \ Mynors \ (1998, 415-423, 445-463). In one section of this passage, Mynors \ provides passages from two different manuscript traditions of \ Malmesbury\'s text. Here, the first colored \ passage is from Malmesbury\'s original version, while the \ second colored passage comes \ from his later revisions of the Gesta. Reproduced from \ Mynors, R.A.B. et alia, ed. and trans. William of Malmesbury \ Gesta Regum Anglorum; a History of the English Kings. Vol. 1. 2 \ vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998, 415-423,445-463. © Estate \ of R.A.B. Mynors, R. M. Thomsom, and M. Winterbottom 1998, \ reproduced by permission of Oxford University Press.
'; var Jumnot='Notes: William of Jumièges\' Gesta Normannorum \ Ducem
\ \1. Robert of Jumièges, a Norman, was made archbishop of \ Canterbury by Edward in 1051, but forced into exile by Earl Godwin and his \ sons\' successful return to power in 1052. Notably, Robert was \ uncanonically replaced by Stigand. See Walker \ (1997, 37-38 and 50-51) for a discussion of Robert\'s role as \ Edward\'s messenger.
\ \2. Cf. panels 13 - 28.
\ \3. Cf. panels 37 - 60. Wulfnoth was sent \ as a hostage to Normandy in 1051 and died in Winchester in 1094, \ still a prisoner.
\ \4. Most sources set Edward\'s death on the eve of the Epiphany \ (January 5), 1066, and his burial the next day, though the Vita \ Ædwardi records the date of Edward\'s death as January 4. \ See Barlow (1992, 124, n. 329) \ for a discussion of the dating. See also Glossary: Death of \ Edward.
\William of Jumièges dates the year from March 25 \ (Annunciation style).
\ \5. The interpolation makes for a confused chronology; Harold \ likely married his second wife Edith, also known as Alditha (not to \ be confused with Harold\'s first wife, Edith "Swan-neck") between \ August 1063 and 1066 (see Walker (1997, 116-117)).
\ \6. Cf. panel 76.
\ \7. Orderic, both here and in his Historia (Library: Orderic \ Vitalis (¦3)), is the only source to claim \ actual contact between Tostig and Duke William. Additionally, \ Tostig allied with Harald Hardrada, not Harald Fairhair. Like many \ other chroniclers, Orderic confuses the earlier Harald Harfagr \ ("fairhair") with the later Norwegian king.
\ \8. Conan \ II, Count of Brittany, was also the target of \ William\'s earlier Breton Campaign; cf. \ panels 46 \ - 54.
\ \9. Cf. panels 81 - 94. William of \ Jumièges\' number of ships is somewhat exaggerated. \ Gillmor (1996, 114-15) \ examines all accounts of the Norman fleet and calculates that the \ fleet numbered somewhere around 700 vessels. See also Glossary: The \ Norman Channel-Crossing.
\ \10. Cf. panels 114 - 116.
\ \11. The Battle of Stamford Bridge took place on \ September 25, 1066. In this battle, Harold defeated the combined \ forces of his brother Tostig and King Harald Hardrada of Norway. \ For accounts of this battle, see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶3), William of \ Malmesbury (¶4), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \12. I.e. Saturday, October 14, 1066. In mid-October, the sun \ rises in the south of England around 6:30 in the morning, placing \ the third hour (terce) at approximately 8:30 A.M.
\ \13. William\'s estimation of casualties are somewhat inflated, as \ in all likelihood only 14,000 troops fought on both sides. The \ carnage was great, however; Wright (1996, 103) estimates \ some 6,000 human and 600 equine casualties, and calculates that on \ the ridge of the battle, there were "at least six human bodies and \ a horse for every yard of hill."
\ \14. William here refers to King Edward\'s brother Alfred, who was \ slain when he returned to England in 1036 from exile in Normandy, \ and to Harald Hardrada of Norway.
\ \15. For looting of corpses in the Tapestry, see the lower \ borders of panels 167 - 170.
\ \16. See also the beginning of the Chronicle of Battle Abbey and \ the Brevis \ Relatio (¶3).
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Elisabeth Van Houts bases her edition of Jumièges\' \ original text of this excerpt of Gesta Normannorum Ducem on \ MS Bodleian 517, a manuscript from the late-eleventh or \ early-twelfth century, written in a Norman hand but possibly from \ England. The later additions of Orderic Vitalis are based on \ Bibliothèque Municipale MS 1174 (Saint-Évroul, \ c. 1113) and Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek MS BPL 20 (Le \ Bec, c. 1139).
\Van Houts\' 1992 edition and translation supercedes J. Marx\'s \ 1914 edition.
\===================
\Brown, R. Allen, ed. The Norman Conquest of England: Sources \ and Documents. Vol. 5. Rochester: Boydell, 1984, 1-15.
\Marx, Jean, ed. William of Jumièges: Gesta \ Normannorum Ducum. Paris: August Picard, 1914.
\Plassmann, A. "Der Wandel Des Normannischen Geschichtsbildes Im \ 11. Jahrhundert. Eine Quellenstudie Zu Dudo Von St. Quentin Und \ Wilhelm Von Jumièges." Historisches Jahrbuch 115.1 \ (1995): 88-207.
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M.C. "The Gesta Normannorum Ducum: A \ History Without an End." Anglo-Norman Studies 3 (1981): \ 106-18 and 215-20.
\_____. ed. The Gesta Normannorum Ducem of William of \ Jumièges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigni. 2 \ vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
'; var Jumabt='Excerpt from William of Jumièges\' Gesta Normannorum \ Ducem ("Deeds of the Norman leaders"), with interpolations and \ additions by Orderic Vitalis and Robert of Torigni
\Introduction:
\
William of Jumièges, a Norman monk born close to the year \
1000, completed the first version c. 1070, making his Latin \
account one of the earliest literary sources of the Norman \
Conquest. William\'s text was revised and expanded by the \
Anglo-Norman monk Orderic Vitalis ca. 1109-1113; the Norman \
monk Robert of Torigni then built upon Vitalis\'s work in the late \
1130s.
William added an account of the Norman Conquest to the \ Gesta to help legitimize King William\'s accession to the \ English throne, and undoubtedly incorporated local details into his \ collation of written sources. Though sometimes curt in description, \ its outline of the events of 1064-66 bears a close resemblance to \ the Bayeux Tapestry in many details.
\The version here is excerpted from Van Houts, Elisabeth M.C., \ ed. The Gesta Normannorum Ducem of William of Jumièges, \ Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigni. 2 vols. Oxford: \ Clarendon Press, 1992, II.158-173. © Elisabeth M. C. van Houts \ 1992, reproduced by permission of Oxford University Press.
\William\'s original writing is presented in plain text; later \ writings are presented in italics. All additions in this \ section of the Gesta are from Orderic Vitalis, none is from \ Robert of Torigni. All extrapolations that substantially alter \ William\'s original text are presented in colored italics and immediately follow the \ original text they revise. Reproduced with permission from Oxford \ University Press.
'; var Hydenot='Notes: Hyde Chronicle
\ \1. This excerpt immediately follows an account of the death of \ Harold\'s father, Earl Godwin. According to the \ account, Godwin dies while dining with King Edward the \ Confessor and swearing upon his life that he had no \ part in the murder of Alfred, Edward\'s brother, in 1036. This \ episode relates thematically to Harold\'s own problems with oaths in \ the following section.
\ \2. Cf. panels 7 - 13. For similar accounts of \
Harold being blown off course, see Eadmer of Canterbury (¶4), \
William of \
Malmesbury (¶2), and Henry of Huntingdon \
(¶1).
\
-----
3. Cf. panels 23 - 39.
\
-----
4. Cf. panel 59. On Harold\'s possible \ betrothal, see panel 39.
\ \5. St. Pancras was born in Syria or Phrygia and died in Rome \ c. 304. Oaths taken in Saint Pancras\'s church in Rome were \ believed especially sacred. In the 7th century, Pope Saint Vitalian \ sent some of Saint Pancras\'s relics to England as part of the \ missionary effort in England; they were eventually enshrined in his \ titular church in London (and so named the borough and railway \ station). St. Pancras is, among other things, the patron saint \ against false witness, against perjury, and of oaths and \ treaties.
\For a similar account of this reliquary, see the Brevis \ Relatio (¶1).
\ \6. Cf. Harold\'s heroic depiction in panel 45.
\ \7. Cf. panels 61 - 63.
\ \8. Edward died on Holy Innocents\' Day, December 28, 1065, after \
reigning for 23 years; cf. Glossary: Death of \
Edward and panels 66 - 72.
\
\
-----
9. The chronicler stresses William\'s legitimate blood relation \ to Edward through the English king\'s mother, Emma-Ælfgifu. \ Further, he discredits Harold\'s only and already tenuous familial \ claim to the English throne through his sister Queen \ Edith, King Edward\'s wife.
\ \10. Cf. panel 80.
\ \11. Cf. panel 75.
\ \12. Cf. panels 94 - 104. Sources variously \
report that William landed at Pevensey on either the eve or day of \
St. Michael\'s feast, i.e. September 28 or September 29 (see \
Glossary: \
The Norman Channel-Crossing). Like the Carmen de Hastingae \
Proelio (¶5), the Hyde Chronicle misreports \
the date of the visibility of Halley\'s comet, which was visible in \
England and Normandy in April and May of 1066, but not in \
September.
\
-----
13. For an excellent appendix of medieval writers who mention \ the comet in 1066, see Freeman (1875, 645-650); for a \ bibliography of scholarship on the comet see Thomson \ (1998, Vol. 2, 211-212).
\ \14. St. Omer in Flanders had strong ties with the Godwin family. \ In 1056, Harold may have visited Flanders, and in 1069, Gytha, \ Harold\'s mother, sought refuge at St. Omer. See Grierson (1931, \ passim) and Walker (1997, 192).
\ \15. I.e. Harald Hardrada, king of Norway. Like many other \ accounts, the text here confuses the earlier Harald Harfagr \ ("fairhair") with the later Norwegian king.
\ \16. Earl Edwin of Mercia and Earl Morcar of Northumbria\'s forces \ were defeated by Harald and Tostig\'s invasion force at the bloody \ battle of Fulford, about two miles south of York, on September 20. \ The account of an actual siege of York and the concomitant \ slaughter of clergy and citizens is unique, and runs counter to the \ accounts in versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶5), which report that after Edwin and Morcar\'s defeat at the \ Battle of Fulford, Harald and Tostig negotiated a peaceful \ occupation of York.
\ \17. Actually, Harald and Tostig maintained their forces with \ their fleet at Ricall, ten miles south of York. However, Harold\'s \ English army caught the invaders unprepared at Stamford Bridge, as \ they expected to negotiate the final surrender of York at that \ time.
\ \18. The Battle of Stamford Bridge took place on \ September 25. Harold defeated the combined forces of his brother \ Tostig and King Harald Hardrada of Norway at this battle.
\ \19. Magnus Haraldsson ruled Norway with his brother Olaf III \ Haraldsson, until his death in 1069.
\ \20. The collapse of the church tower is unattested in other \ accounts of the battle.
\ \21. For William\'s speech, cf. panel 134.
\ \22. A number of later accounts record the unlikely detail that \ William destroyed his fleet upon landing (see Battle Abbey \ Chronicle (¶3) and Wace (¶52)). \ Taylor (1975, 130, n. 1) \ posits that the idea could have arisen from the Tapestry\'s \ representation in panel 103 of the unstepping of masts upon \ landing.
\ \23. For Gyrth\'s death in the Tapestry, see \ panel \ 151.
\ \24. The Latin here is quite confused, and the account of a \ deliberate wounding of Harold\'s horse is unique. It may be related, \ however, to the account of Gyrth and Harold\'s argument before the \ battle, and Gyrth\'s accidental striking of Harold\'s horse in \ Wace \ (¶77-78).
\ \25. For Harold\'s death, cf. panel 169.
\
-----
26. Most sources date William\'s coronation to Christmas Day, not \ December 26.
\ \27. Cf. the beginning of the Chronicle of Battle \ Abbey.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\A fragment of a late part of the so-called Hyde Chronicle \ survives in a single witness, British Library MS Cotton Domitian \ Axiv. The main surviving version of the Hyde Chronicle (the \ Liber Monasterii De Hyda), which forms the basis of Edward\'s \ Rolls Series edition, stops at 1023. Another Cottonian manuscript, \ MS Cotton Vittelius Fii, records another version of the Hyde \ Chronicle covering material from the reign of Æthelstan to \ Edward III. Edwards (xciii) notes that this manuscript was lost in \ the Cotton fire of 1731.
\The fragment now called Chronicia Monasterii de Hida Juxta \ Wintoniam has remained unedited since Edward\'s 1866 treatment, \ and untranslated altogether. Elisabeth Van Houts is currently \ working on an edition of this fragment, though at the time of \ writing it remains unpublished.
\===================
\Edwards, Edward, ed. Liber Monasterii De Hyda; Comprising a \ Chronicle of the Affairs of England, from the Settlement of the \ Saxons to the Reign of King Canute; and a Cartulary of the Abbey of \ Hyde, in Hampshire. A.D. 455-1023. Rolls Ser. Vol. 45. London: \ Longman, 1886.
\Gillingham, John. "Henry of Huntingdon and the Twelfth-Century \ Revival of the English Nation." Concepts of National Identity in \ the Middle Ages. Ed. Simon Forde et al. Leeds: School of \ English, University of Leeds, 1995. 75-101 (see Appx. "The Hyde \ Chronicle," 90-91).
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M. C. "The Memory of 1066 in Written and \ Oral Traditions." Anglo-Norman Studies 19 (1997): \ 167-79.
'; var Hydeabt='Excerpt from the Chronicia Monasterii de Hida Juxta \ Wintoniam ("Chronicle of the monastery of Hyde joined to \ Winchester")
\Introduction:
\
The titled provenance of the fragmentary Chronicia Monasterii de \
Hida Juxta Wintoniam; Ab Anno 1035 ad Annum 1121 has appeared \
dubious since Edward Edwards first edited it in 1866. Noting the \
extreme pro-Norman bias of the fragment, Edwards (1866, xcvi) \
wonders if the work should "be deemed really the production of a \
monk of Hyde." More recently, Van Houts (1997, 177-178) has \
adumbrated an argument placing the production of the chronicle in \
Normandy, c. 1130, and attributing authorship to a figure \
attached to the Warenne family.
The chronicle is noted for its reference to many unidentified \ oral sources, and particular details regarding Harold\'s oaths to \ William and the king\'s actions leading up to Hastings.
\The version here was translated from the Latin by Martin K. Foys \
and Harry Neilson III from Edwards\'s edition (289-294).
Notes: Henry of Huntingdon\'s Historia Anglorum
\ \1. This excerpt begins with the death of Henry I and the \ succession of Philip I to the throne of the kingdom of France, \ which the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, version E, reports in 1060. \ However, the twenty-second year of King Edward the Confessor\'s \ reign in England would be 1063-1064. In Normandy, William conquered \ the neighboring region of Maine in 1063. Harold\'s mission (see \ Glossary: \ Harold\'s Mission to Normandy) most likely took place \ in 1064.
\ \2. Cf. panels 7 - 13. For similar accounts of \
Harold being blown off course, see Eadmer of Canterbury (¶4), \
William of \
Malmesbury (¶2), and the Hyde Chronicle \
(¶1).
\
-----
3. Cf. panel 59. On Harold\'s possible \
betrothal, see panel 39.
\
-----
4. Tostig, Harold\'s brother.
\ \5. Harold actually was the second oldest of the Godwin sons, \ while Tostig was third born.
\ \6. Morat is a type of wine or honey flavored with mulberry \ juice.
\ \7. 1065-1066.
\ \8. Edwin, Morcar\'s brother and earl of Mercia.
\ \9. Cf. panels 66 - 72.
\Holy Innocents\' Day is December 28; the feast of the Epiphany is \ January 6.
\Edgar Atheling, son of Edward the exile, grandson of Edmund \ Ironside, great-grandson of Æthelræd II (the \ Unready) . In 1066, Edgar would have been around fifteen \ years of age.
\ \10. Cf. panels 71 - 72.
\ \11. Harold\'s father, Earl Godwin , was implicated in the \ murder of Alfred Atheling, Edward\'s brother, upon the his return \ from exile in Normandy in 1036.
\The Godwin family was briefly exiled by Edward in 1051-1052. At \ this time, the Norman Robert of Jumièges became Archbishop \ of Canterbury, but was quickly and uncanonically ousted by Stigand while en route to Rome \ to receive his pallium; Odda of Deerhurst was a kinsmen of Edward\'s \ who was appointed to an earldom which consisted of lands in the \ southwest of England that had been taken from the Godwins. \ Contra Henry\'s report, Odda appears to have held on to some \ or all of these lands until his death in 1056 (see Walker \ (1997, 49)).
\ \12. Cf. panel 80.
\ \13. Cf. panels 81 - 87.
\ \14. Harald Hardrada, king of Norway.
\ \15. Edwin and Morcar\'s forces were defeated by Harald and \ Tostig\'s invasion force at the bloody battle of Fulford, about two \ miles south of York, on September 20. Upon their victory, Tostig \ and Harald Hardrada occupied York.
\ \16. Harold defeated the combined forces of his brother Tostig \ and King Harald Hardrada of Norway at the Battle of Stamford Bridge \ on September 25, 1066 (Glossary: Battle of Stamford Bridge). \ For other accounts of this battle, see the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶3) and William of Malmesbury\'s Gesta \ Regum Anglorum (¶4).
\ \17 .William\'s forces did not land until September 28-29.
\For the Tapestry\'s depiction of fortifications at Hastings, see \ panels \ 114 - 116.
\Henry inserted the following speech in a later (c. 1040) \ redaction of his history (see Greenway (1996, lxxi, cvii \ and 389, n. 163)). For a representation of William\'s speech in the \ Tapestry, see panels 134ff.
\ \18. Hasting (Old Norse "Hásteinn, Latin "Hastingus") was \ a Norseman raider who had an active career on the Continent. He is \ also listed as an invader in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, \ years 892 and 893). William of Malmesbury also closely relates \ Hasting with Rollo (here below referred to as "Rou"), the founder \ of Normandy (see Thomson (1998, (vol.I) \ 201)). See also Greenway (1996, lxxi, cvii \ and 389, n. 164).
\ \19. Henry, somewhat inaccurately, refers to the Viking siege of \ Paris in 885-886. Rou is Rollo, the first Duke of the Normans.
\ \20. Henry refers to the capture of King Louis IV in 945 by \ Duke Richard \ I , William\'s great-grandfather.
\ \21. Rainald, count of Burgandy (see Greenway (1996, 391, n. \ 167)).
\ \22. At the battle of Mortemer, in 1054, William stopped an \ invasion of Normandy by the combined forces of King Henry I of \ France and Geoffrey Martel, count of Anjou. Ralph the Chamberlain\'s \ identity is otherwise unknown (see Greenway \ (1996, 379, n. 133)).
\ \23. Henry again notes that Harold\'s father, Earl Godwin, was \ implicated in the murder of Alfred Atheling, Edward\'s \ brother, upon his return from exile in Normandy in 1036. Alfred, \ and Edward, were related to William through their mother, \ Emma-Ælfgifu , who was William\'s \ great aunt.
\ \24. The Tapestry perhaps shows a similar effect of William\'s \ speech; see panels 135ff.
\ \25. For other accounts of Tallifer, see Wace (¶133), \
Carmen de \
Hastingae Proelio (¶22), and Geoffrey Gaimar \
(¶5).
\
-----
26. For a depiction of the Anglo-Saxon shield wall, see \ panels \ 145 - 146.
\ \27. Henry refers to an episode later named the malfosse \ (literally "bad ditch") in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey \ (¶5). For a discussion of this scene, and arguments that it is \ also represented in the Tapestry, see panel 157.
\ \28. Archers make two appearances in the Tapestry, first \ supporting the initial Norman charge (see panel 141). In the \ later part of the battle, the archers make a second appearance and \ occupy the space of the lower border for a good number of panels. \ See panels 159ff. In panel 164, the \ archers noticeably change the arc of their firing, also described \ by Huntingdon.
\ \29. For the English "standard" (Henry\'s Latin text uses the \ French term standard), see panel 168.
\ \30. Henry\'s description of Harold\'s death by arrow parallels the \ Tapestry\'s representation (see panel 169 or Glossary: Death of \ Harold), leading some scholars to argue that Henry \ was influenced by the Tapestry (see panel 169 for a full \ discussion). For the deaths of his brothers Gyrth \ and Leofwine, see panels 150 - \ 151.
\ \31. Cf. panel 75.
\ \32. I.e. October 14.
\ \33. See also the beginning of the Chronicle of Battle \ Abbey and William of Jumièges \ (¶8).
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Henry\'s Historia Anglorum survives in some forty-five \ manuscripts descended from six stages of his revisions. See \ Greenway\'s 1996 edition, cxvii-clviii, for a full treatment of \ these witnesses.
\Though the Historia appears in various forms in \ nineteenth-century editions and translations, Diana Greenway\'s 1996 \ composite edition and translation is the only twentieth-century \ treatment of this text.
\===================
\Arnold, Thomas, ed. Henrici Archidiaconi Huntendunensis \ Historia Anglorum (Rolls ser.) Vol. 74. London: Eyre and \ Spottiswoode, 1879.
\Gillingham, John. "Henry of Huntingdon and the Twelfth-Century \ Revival of the English Nation." Concepts of National Identity in \ the Middle Ages. Ed. Simon Forde et al. Leeds: School of \ English, University of Leeds, 1995. 75-101.
\Greenway, Diana. "Authority, convention and observation in Henry \ of Huntingdon\'s Historia Anglorum." Anglo-Norman \ Studies 18 (1996), 105-22.
\_____. "Henry of Huntingdon and the Manuscripts of His \ Historia Anglorum. Anglo-Norman Studies 9 (1987), \ 103-126.
\_____, ed. Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon; Historia \ Anglorum (the History of the English People). Oxford: Clarendon \ Press, 1996.
'; var Huntabt='Excerpt from Henry of Huntingdon\'s Historia Anglorum ("A \ history of the English people")
\Introduction:
\
Henry of Huntingdon, an Anglo-Norman cleric born in England \
c. 1088, succeeded his father as archdeacon of Huntingdon in \
1110. Sometime in the 1120s, Bishop Alexander of Lincoln \
commissioned Henry to write a history of the English kingdom that \
would be accessible to a less-educated audience. Henry completed \
the first seven books of his Historia Anglorum by 1133; over \
the next twenty years he first completed the ten book series and \
then revised and added to the work until his death in c. \
1156. Henry\'s account of the Norman Conquest draws most heavily \
from English, and possibly French vernacular, sources. It is, \
however, unabashedly pro-Norman and rife with anti-Harold \
sentiment.
In his third revision (c. 1040), Henry added a version of \ William\'s speech to his troops before Hastings (see Greenway (1996, \ cvi-cvii).
\The version here is excerpted from Diana Greenway\'s (Henry, \ Archdeacon of Huntingdon; Historia Anglorum. Oxford: Clarendon \ Press, 1996, 380-395. © Diana Greenaway 1996, reproduced by \ permission of Oxford University Press.
'; var Gaimnot='Notes: Geffrei Gaimar\'s L\'Estoire des Engleis
\ \1. Edward reigned from 1042 to 1066. Most sources set Edward\'s \ death on the eve of the Epiphany (January 5), 1066, and his burial \ the next day, though the Vita Ædwardi (Library: Vita) \ records the date of Edward\'s death as January 4. See Barlow \ (1992, 124, n. 329) for a discussion of the dating
\ \2. Edith did not die until 1075 (see Glossary: Queen \ Edith). For Edward\'s death and burial, cf. \ panels 66 \ - 70 or Glossary: Death of Edward.
\ \3. Cf. panels 75 - 76. The Day of the \ procession of the Major Litany is April 25.
\ \4. The location of Wardstane remains unknown.
\ \5. Copsi, a lieutenant of Tostig with lands in Yorkshire and \ Lincolnshire. See Walker (1997, 103, 154).
\ \6. Bell (1960, 266) tentatively \ identifies Brunemue as Westbourne.
\ \7. Earl Edwin of Mercia
\ \8. That is to say, Earl Morcar of Northumbria defended the land \ on the north shore of the Humber while Edwin\'s force defended the \ south shore.
\ \9. Malcom Canmore, king of Scotland.
\ \10. I.e. Harald Hardrada. Like many other accounts, the text \ confuses the earlier Harald Harfagr ("fairhair") with the later \ Norwegian king.
\ \11. Bell (1960, 266) notes a \ possible identification of St. Wilfrid\'s with Brayton, near \ Selby.
\ \12. Edwin and Morcar\'s forces were defeated by Harald and \ Tostig\'s invasion force at the bloody battle of Fulford, about two \ miles south of York, on September 20. Upon their victory, Tostig \ and Harald Hardrada occupied York. Harold\'s forces then engaged and \ defeated the invasion force at the Battle of Stamford \ Bridge, which took place on September 25, 1066. \ Harold defeated the combined forces of his brother Tostig and King \ Harald Hardrada of Norway at this battle. For accounts of this \ battle, see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶3),William of \ Malmesbury (¶4), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \13. i.e. Hardrada\'s son Olaf, later known as Olaf "the Peaceful" \ <(font color="#000000">Walker(1997, 164)).
\ \14. Cf. panels 81 - 94. Gaimar\'s figure of \ ships is extraordinarily exaggerated. Gillmor \ (1996, 114-15) examines all accounts of the Norman fleet and \ calculates that the fleet numbered somewhere around 700 vessels. \ See also Glossary: The Norman \ Channel-Crossing.
\ \15. Cf. panels 114 - 116.
\ \16. Ealdred, archbishop of York.
\ \17. Marleswein, Sheriff of Lincolnshire and possible a staller \ for Harold, charged with helping to rebuild the depleted English \ forces in the north. See Walker (1997, 142, 169).
\ \18. For the deaths of Gyrth and Leofwine, see panels 151 - \ 152.
\ \19. Cf. panel 144. For other accounts of \ Tallifer, see Wace (¶133), Carmen de Hastingae \ Proelio (¶22), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶6).
\ \20. On Alan I ("the Red"), count of Brittany, lord of Richmond, \ and his holdings, see Douglas (1964, 267-268).
\ \21. Cf. panels 170 - 173. For Harold\'s death, \ see panel 169; for the deaths of Gyrth \ and Leofwine, see panels 151 - \ 152.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Alexander Bell bases his edition of L\'Estoire des Engleis \ on the oldest of four known manuscripts of the work, Durham \ Cathedral MS Civ. 27 (early thirteenth century), with minor \ revisions supplied by the other three extant MSS.
\Bell\'s edition is the only twentieth-century treatment of this \ text, supplanting Hardy and Martin\'s 1889 Rolls Series translation \ and Wright\'s 1850 edition for the Caxton Society. Its introduction \ also supplies a full discussion of the possible identity of \ Geffrey, his sources, language, and the dating of the text.
\===================
\Bell, Alexander, ed. L\'estoire Des Engleis by Geffrei \ Gaimar. Vol. XIV-XVI. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1960.
\Freeman, Elizabeth. "Geffrei Gaimar, Vernacular Historiography, \ and the Assertion of Authority." Studies in Philology 2 \ (1996): 188-206.
\Hardy, Sir Thomas Duffus and Charles Trice Martin, ed. L\'estoire \ Des Engles, [by] Maistre Geffrei Gaimar. Vol. 91.1 and 91.2. \ London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1889.
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M. C. "The Memory of 1066 in Written and \ Oral Traditions." Anglo-Norman Studies 19 (1997): 167-79, \ 174.
\Williams, Anne. The English and the Norman Conquest. \ Woodbridge: Boydell, 1995. 181-182.
\Wright, Thomas, ed. The Anglo-Norman Metrical Chronicle of \ Geoffrey Gaimar, Printed for the First Time in Entire from the Ms. \ in the British Museum. London: A. Black, 1850.
'; var Gaimabt='Excerpt from Geffrei Gaimar\'s L\'Estoire des Engleis ("The \ history of the English")
\Introduction:
\
Little is known about Geffrey Gaimar, who wrote the Anglo-Norman \
poem L\'Estoire des Engleis ca. 1135-1140. He was \
probably a native of England, or if not, a longstanding resident. \
His patroness was Constance, wife of Ralph fitz Gilbert, a leading \
figure in twelfth-century Lincolnshire, and he was possibly \
connected to the court of Hugh d\'Avranches, Earl of Chester. \
Geffrey likely began his writing while living in Hampshire and \
finished it in Lincolnshire. For his verse history, Geffrey draws \
on a wide variety of English sources, including one or two versions \
of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. For contemporary events, he \
likely used eye-witness accounts and personal experiences. The work \
survives only in fragmentary form, representative of only a part of \
his larger design.
The version here is adapted by the author from the Rolls series \ translation Hardy (1889, 163-169), with consultation \ of the edition by Bell (1960, 163-170). Line numbers are \ listed in red \ italics.
'; var Ednot='Notes: Vita Ædwardi
\ \1. Barlow (1992, xl ff.) notes \ that MS Harley 526 contains a lacuna immediately before this \ section. He estimates that some 1,220 words are missing, including \ a lead section on Edward\'s death, which probably described Edward\'s \ dedication of Westminster Abbey. The order of the \ Bayeux Tapestry\'s narrative and its explicit linking of Westminster \ to Edward supports this progression (see panels 66 - 70).
\ \2. Both the author of the Vita and William of Malmesbury \ (Library: \ Malmesbury (¶1) later treat this dream as a \ critical commentary on the fall of English from power, a \ premonition of the Norman Conquest by which, in the words of \ Malmesbury, "England has become a dwelling-place of foreigners and \ a playground for lord\'s of alien blood" (see Mynors \ (1998, 414-416)). Like the central narrative of the Tapestry, \ though, in the pro-Norman interpretative context of post-Conquest \ England, the healthy reunion of tree and sap easily could be read \ as a symbol of William\'s familial relation to Edward through \ Queen \ Emma-Ælfgifu and his successful restoration of their \ shared bloodline to the throne. See also Barlow \ (1992, 130-131) for a discussion of later readings of Edward\'s \ prophesy of the green tree.
\ \3. As Freeman (1875, 586) first \ noted, and as most subsequent scholars agree, Edward\'s deathbed \ scene in panel 70 closely resembles the \ description presented here. Barlow (1992, 116, n. 296), \ and Brown (1977, 59-61), argue \ that the designer of the Tapestry used the Vita as a direct \ source. However, Cowdrey (1996, 107) \ contrasts the Tapestry\'s depiction of Edward\'s death with the \ Vita Ædwardi, and claims that the latter obscures \ Edward\'s behest, while the former "seems designed to display the \ events of the death-bed much more clearly." See also Glossary: Death of \ Edward.
\ \4. I.e. Archbishop Stigand.
\ \5. Barlow (1992, 122, n. 323, \ 324) notes that while it is tempting to translate the Latin term \ nutricius here as "foster son" or "adopted heir," the \ pattern of usage by the author indicates that the term most likely \ means "governor" or "protector." See Barlow \ (2002, 89-90) for a later discussion of this scene. Brown \ (1984, 59) reevaluates the rhetoric of this passage and considers \ the possibility that Edward here and in the Tapestry does not \ bequeath the kingdom to Harold, but only put his kingdom in \ Harold\'s safekeeping until William\'s arrival. See also Oleson \ (1957, 227 and n. 2) for a similar dismissal of the idea of \ Edward\'s deathbed gift of the throne to Harold. See also Glossary: Death of \ Edward.
\ \6. Though the Vita Ædwardi records the date of \ Edward\'s death as January 4, 1066, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ entries for 1065-66 (Library: Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¦1)) and most other sources set his death on the eve of the \ Epiphany (January 5), and his burial the next day. See Barlow \ (1992, 124, n. 329) for a discussion of the dating.
\ \7. Cf. the hand of God above Westminster in panel 67.
\ \8. For a representation of the procession and mourning, see \ panels 66 \ - 69.
\ \9. Cf. the group of singing clergymen in panel 69.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\The Vita survives in a single, defective manuscript, \ British Library MS Harley 526, c. 1100.
\Frank Barlow\'s 1992 revision of his 1962 translation and edition \ remains the authoritative work of reference for this text.
\===================
\Barlow, Frank. Edward the Confessor. 2nd ed. London: Eyre \ Metheun, 1979.
\_______. ed. Vita Ædwardi Regis Qui Apud \ Westmonasterium Requiescit. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon, \ 1992.
\Heningham, Eleanor K. "The Genuineness of the Vita \ Ædwardi Regis." Speculum xxi (1946), 419-456.
\_________ . "The Literary Unity, the Date, and the Purpose of \ the Lady Edith\'s book: \'The Life of King Edward who rests at \ Westminster\'." Albion vii (1975), 24-40.
\John, Eric. "Edward the Confessor and the Norman Succession." \ English Historical Review 94 (1979): 241-67, esp. \ 264-267.
\Southern, R.W. "The First Life of Edward the Confessor." \ EHR lviii (1943), 385-400.
'; var Edabt='\ Excerpt from Vita Ædwardi Regis qui apud Westmonasterium \ requiescit ("The life of King Edward who rests at Westminster")
\Introduction:
\
The Vita Ædwardi is a hagiographical piece \
commissioned by Queen Edith, Edward\'s wife and the sister of Harold \
Godwinson, and attributed to an unknown monk of Saint-Bertin. It \
was most likely begun c. 1065 and finished in 1067 (see \
Barlow \
(1992, xviii - lix)). It is generally believed that this passage \
was directly consulted for panels 67 - 70 of the Tapestry, though \
it could simply be drawing on a common source or oral tradition. As \
Barlow \
(2002, 7) notes, the piece interprets the events of the Norman \
Conquest in terms of chansons de geste. See Stafford \
(1997, 48-49) for the argument that its use in the Tapestry \
represents the success of Edith\'s political \
agenda.
Translation excerpted from Barlow, Frank, ed. Vita \ Ædwardi Regis Qui Apud Westmonasterium Requiescit. 2nd \ ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1992, 116-127. © Frank Barlow 1962, \ 1992, reproduced by permission of Oxford University Press.
'; var Eadmnot='Notes: Eadmer of Canterbury\'s Historia Novorum in \ Anglia
\ \1. This excerpt begins in the middle of a catalogue of evils \ which Eadmer reports that St. Dunstan had foretold. Eadmer \ considers the destruction of monasteries under Edward the \ Confessor , and the Norman Conquest to be two such \ evils. Emma is Emma-Ælfgifu, William the \ Conqueror\'s great aunt, and Richard is, of course, William\'s \ grandfather.
\ \2. Harold Godwinson\'s father, Earl Godwin .
\ \3. Brooks (1978, 10-11) and \ Wissolik (1979, \ passim) maintain that the first parts of the Tapestry follow \ Eadmer\'s version of events and is more sympathetic to the English \ side of the story. Both Brooks and Wissolik consider the meeting \ between Edward and Harold in panel 1 through the interpretative lens \ of Eadmer\'s account, and argue that Edward there admonishes Harold \ for wishing to free his relatives from William.
\ \4. Cf. panels 7 - 13. For similar accounts of \ Harold being blown off course, see Hyde Chronicle (¶1), \ William of \ Malmesbury (¶2), and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶1).
\ \5. Cf. panel 27 and, possibly, panel 21.
\ \6. Cf. panels 22 - 28 and panel 38. \ Wissolik (1982, 104) and \ possibly Bruce (1856, 49) rely on \ Eadmer\'s account, and contend that the Tapestry represents two \ different sets of messengers.
\ \7. For discussions relating William\'s meeting with Harold to a \ similar scene in the Tapestry, see panels 37 - 39.
\ \8. Cf. panel 59.
\ \9. Cf. panels 64 - 65.
\ \10. See panels 76 - 80 for the Tapestry\'s \ possible representation of an exchange of messengers between Harold \ and William.
\ \11. Cf. Glossary: Archbishop Stigand.
\
.
Bibliography:
\Eadmer\'s Historia Novorum in Anglia survives in two \ exemplars, MS Corpus Christi College 452 and British Library MS \ Cotton Titus Aix. Southern (1963, 372-373) dates MS CCC 452 shortly \ after 1119 and provides convincing evidence that most of it is an \ autograph of Eadmer\'s. Rule (1884, xiv-xv) dates the Cottonian \ manuscript to the early thirteenth century.
\Martin Rule\'s 1884 work for the Rolls Series remains the only \ edition of the Historia, and relies on MS CCC 452. In 1964, \ Geoffrey Bosanquet provided a translation of Rule\'s edition without \ critical notation.
\
\
======================================
Bosanquet, Geoffrey, trans. Eadmer\'s Historia Novorum in \ Anglia. London: The Cresset Press, 1964.
\Rule, M. ed. Eadmeri Historia Novorum in Anglia, et opuscula \ duo de vita Sancti Anselmi et quibusdam miraculis ejus. Rolls \ Series. London: Longman, 1884.
\Southern,R.W. Saint Anselm and his Biographer Cambridge: \ Cambridge UP, 1963, 298-313.
\Vaughn, S.N. "Eadmer\'s Historia Novorum: a Reinterpretation," \ Anglo-Norman Studies 10 (1988): 259-89.
\Wissolik, Richard D. "Code in the Bayeux Tapestry." Annuale \ Medievale. Ed. Frank Zbozny. Vol. 19. Atlantic Highlands: \ Humanities Press, 1979. 69-97.
\_____. "The Monk Eadmer as Historian of the Norman Succession: \ Korner and Freeman Examined." American Benedictine Review \ 30.1 (1979): 32-43.
\_____. "Duke William\'s Messenger\'s: An \'Insoluble, \ Reverse-Order\' Scene of the Bayeux Tapestry." Medium \ Ævium LI.1 (1982): 102-07.
'; var Eadmabt='Excerpt from Eadmer of Canterbury\'s Historia Novorum in \ Anglia ("A history of recent events in England")
\Introduction:
\
Eadmer of Canterbury was St. Anselm\'s chaplain, secretary, and \
biographer. In conjunction with his biography of Anselm, he wrote \
the first four books of his Historia Novorum in Anglia ca. \
1109-1115. Eadmer was born in England shortly before the Conquest, \
and his writings are usually considered to contain implicit \
Anglo-Saxon sympathies.
Some critics, such as Wissolik (1979, 70ff.), have surmised \ that sections of the Tapestry reference parts of the \ Historia and therefore "code" Anglo-Saxon sympathy into the \ work.
\This excerpt is taken from Bosanquet (1964, 5-9).
'; var Chronnot='Notes: Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
\ \1. Oddly, all versions of the ASC lack entries for year \ 1064, the most probable time that Harold would have been with \ William in Normandy and Brittany. The bulk of the entries for 1065 \ in Versions C, D, and E recount Harold\'s campaign in Wales and the \ Northumbrian revolt against Tostig and his subsequent exile. This \ excerpt begins with the end of Versions C and D\'s entry for \ 1065.
\ \2. Cf. panels 66 - 70. Holy Innocents\' Day is \ December 28; the feast of the Epiphany is January 6. Like the \ ASC, most sources set Edward\'s death on the eve of the \ Epiphany (January 5), and his burial the next day, though the \ Vita Ædwardi records the date of Edward\'s death as \ January 4, 1066. See Barlow (1992, 124, n. 329) \ for discussion of the dating.
\Cf. the hand of God above Westminster in panel 67.
3. Cf. panels 72 - 75.
\ \4. John of Worcester states that Ealdred of York officiated at \ Harold\'s coronation. Contrast to panel 72, which accords with other \ Norman sources in claiming that the uncanonical Stigand presided \ over the ceremony. See also Glossary: The \ Coronation of Harold. John of Worcester also adds a \ positive comment on Harold\'s reign not found in any of the earlier \ sources.
\ \5. Version A\'s entry for 1066 ends here.
\ \6. Whitelock (1961, 141, n. \ 2) notes the implication in Version C that William may have had \ some claim to the throne.
\ \7. The chronicle omits the placename.
\ \8. Earl Edwin of Mercia and his brother Earl Morcar of \ Northumbria (Tostig\'s successor) defeated Tostig in or soon after \ May of 1066; Tostig then fled to Malcom Canmore, king of Scotland; \ over the summer in Scotland he brokered an alliance with Harald \ Hardrada, king of Norway. See also Glossary: Battle \ of Stamford Bridge.
\ \9. The Feast of the Nativity of St. Mary is September 8.
\ \10. Harald Hardrada, king of Norway. The chronicle omits the \ number of ships. Versions D and E, below, number Harald Hardrada\'s \ fleet at 300, while John of Worcester\'s chronicle, which follows \ Version C closely, supplies the number 500.
\ \11. Like version C, above, John of Worcester mentions William\'s \ kinship with Edward, a legitimizing force on William\'s claim to the \ English throne.
\ \12. i.e. Harald Hardrada. Like many other accounts, the text \ confuses the earlier Harald Harfagr ("fairhair") with the later \ Norwegian king.
\ \13. Ricall is about 8 miles due south of York.
\ \14. Edwin and Morcar\'s forces were defeated by Harald and \ Tostig\'s invasion force at the bloody battle of Fulford, about two \ miles south of York, on September 20. Upon their victory, Tostig \ and Harald Hardrada occupied York.
\ \15. i.e. Sunday - Monday, September 24-25. The Battle of Stamford \ Bridge takes place on September 25, 1066, where \ Harold defeats the combined forces of his brother Tostig and King \ Harald Hardrada of Norway. For other accounts of this battle, see \ William of \ Malmesbury (¶4) and Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3).
\ \16. Version C originally ended here, at the bottom of a folio \ (Whitelock\'s note). It has long been thought that a late \ twelfth-century hand here supplies the ending, but Conner \ (1996, lxvii-lxix) believes it likely that the last eight lines are \ actually a replacement ("cancel") for an original last leaf of the \ chronicle which became old and unusable.
\ \17. This is the final entry for Version C. Conner \ (1996, xxxi) argues that the annalist here deliberately left out an \ account of the Battle of Hastings.
\ \18. i.e. Harald Hardrada, king of Norway. Like many other \ accounts, the text here confuses the earlier Harald Harfagr \ ("fairhair") with the later Norwegian king.
\ \19. Paul was the son of the Norse chieftain Thorfinn and \ co-ruled the Orkney islands with his brother Erlend under his \ father\'s name.
\ \20. Cf. panels 114 - 117. Version D reports \ that William landed on the eve of Michaelmas, September 28, while \ Version E reports that William landed on the day of Michaelmas, or \ September 29. See also Glossary: The Norman \ Channel-Crossing.
\ \21. On the death of Harold, cf. panel 169; for the \ deaths of Gyrth and Leofwine, see panels 150 - \ 151.
\ \22. Cf. panels 102ff.
\ \23. John of Worcester\'s date is incorrect; most sources report \ that the Battle of Hastings took place on October 14, a Saturday. \ Darlington (1995, 605, n. \ 8) notes that this date is interlineally corrected to October 14 in \ the primary witness of the chronicle.
\ \24. Archbishop Ealdred, of York; Edgar Atheling, son of Edward \ the exile, grandson of Edmund Ironside, great-grandson of \ Æthelræd II (the \ Unready). In 1066, Edgar would have been around fifteen years of \ age.
\ \25. The festival of Pope Calixtus is October 14.
\ \26. William took his time with regards to London. His forces \ actually circled around the city, first moving through territory to \ the north of London. William approached London by the middle of \ December, and the Normans likely entered the city with little \ serious opposition soon after, as most of the surviving English \ nobles, including Edgar Atheling, and the citizens of London, had \ already submitted to William at Berkhamstead, to the northwest of \ London, in early December. See Douglas (1964, 396-400).
\ \27. Waltheof, earl of east Midlands, Northhamptonshire, and \ Huntingdonshire; Earl William fitz Osbern.
\ \28. What follows is an early twelfth-century edition by the \ Peterborough scribe.
\ \29. i.e. Leofric, earl of Mercia, d. 1057.
\ \30. Queen \
Edith\'s move is unattested elsewhere; see, however, \
Library: Carmen de \
Hastingae Proelio (¶37) for Harold\'s \
dealings with Edith after Hastings. As Barlow (1999, \
37, n. 6) notes, Queen Edith, Edward\'s wife and Harold\'s sister, \
did settle profitably with William.
31. Written later and most likely influenced by Norman accounts \ of Harold\'s coronation by the uncanonical Stigand of \ Canterbury (cf. panel 72), John of \ Worcester\'s chronicle stresses the choice of Ealdred over \ Stigand.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Michael Swanton\'s translation and edition is the most recent \ aggregate treatment of all the versions of the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle. See also Whitelock\'s revised translation, and \ English Historical Documents, 1042-1189 vol.2, no.1.
\Editions of individual versions have come out as part of David \ Dumville & Michael Lapidge\'s collaborative project - see \ Bately, Conner and Cubbin. For Version E, see Whitelock\'s 1954 \ edition.
\John of Worcester\'s Chronicon ex Chronicis has been most \ recently edited by R.R. Darlington and P. McGurk. Volume II covers \ the history from 450 to 1066; volume III extends from 1067 to the \ history\'s final continuation in 1141.
\Versions A, C, D and E of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle all \ exist in single manuscripts:
\Version A (Parker Chronicle): Corpus Christi College, Cambridge \ MS 173.
\Version C (Abingdon Chronicle): British Library MS Cotton Tiber \ Bi.
\Version D:British Library MS Cotton Tiber Biv.
\Version E (Peterborough Chronicle): Bodleian MS Laud Misc. \ 636.
\John of Worcester\'s Chronicle survives in five complete copies. \ The primary witness is Corpus Christi College MS 157. See \ Darlington (1995, xxi-lxvii) for a complete discussion of all \ witnesses.
\===================
\Bately, Janet, ed. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: Ms. A. (The \ Anglo-Saxon chronicle : a collaborative edition Vol. 3). Cambridge: \ D.S. Brewer, 1986.
\Clark, Cecily. "The Narrative Mode of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ before the conquest." England before the Conquest: Studies in \ Primary Sources Presented to Dorothy Whitelock. Ed. Peter \ Clemoes and Kathleen Hughes. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1971. \ 215-35.
\Conner, Patrick W., ed. The Abingdon Chronicle, A.D. \ 956-1066. (The Anglo-Saxon chronicle : a collaborative edition \ Vol. 10). Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1996.
\Cubbin, G.P., ed. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: Ms D. (The \ Anglo-Saxon chronicle : a collaborative edition Vol. 6). Cambridge: \ D.S. Brewer, 1996.
\Darlington, R.R. and P. McGurk, ed. The Chronicle of John of \ Worcester, 450-1066.vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
\Douglas, D.C. and G.W., and Greenaway, eds. English \ Historical Documents, Vol. 2. 1042-1189. 2 ed. Oxford: Oxford \ UP, 1981.
\Swanton, Michael J., ed. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. \ Routledge: New York, 1998.
\Whitelock, Dorothy, ed. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: A Revised \ Translation. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1986.
\_____, ed. The Peterborough Chronicle. (Early English \ manuscripts in facsimile Vol. 4). Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and \ Bagger, 1954.
'; var Chronabt='Annals 1065 and 1066 from Versions A, C, D, and E of the \ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \Introduction:
\
Versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are the only \
contemporary English accounts of the events leading up to and \
including the Battle of Hastings. The original plan and copy of the \
Chronicle, written in the vernacular, originated in Wessex sometime \
in the mid- to late ninth century; copies were disseminated to and \
then maintained by monastic centers throughout England.
John of Worcester\'s Chronicon ex Chronicis, a Latin \ history of the world extending until 1140, used one or more \ versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a source, though \ with some substantial additions.
\
\
Five variations of the ASC (color coded in this edition) \
contain accounts of the Conquest:
Version A, also known as the \ "Parker Chronicle," was maintained at Winchester for much of its \ existence, but moved to Canterbury in the mid-eleventh century. It \ contains the tersest entry for the year 1066.
\Version C, also known as the "Abingdon Chronicle" \ (presented in plain black text,) was copied and continued at \ Abingdon in the mid-eleventh century. C is the most descriptive of \ the accounts, appears somewhat sympathetic to William\'s claim to \ the throne, but unfortunately ends in the middle of 1066, at the \ account of the Battle of Stamford Bridge and before the Norman \ invasion.
\Version D was likely \ compiled, copied, and maintained at York. This redaction pays \ particular attention to events in the north of England, though it \ also notably contains the only description of the Battle of \ Hastings. Parts of D\'s account are identical to Version C, noted in \ the text by the rubric "(C/D)."
\Though Version E, also known \ as the "Peterborough Chronicle," like Version D, was originally a \ northern text, by the mid-eleventh century it had moved to \ Canterbury. The surviving copy was made at Peterborough in the \ early 1120s.
\The Chronicle of John of \ Worcester was composed and updated throughout a period \ beginning as early as 1095 and as late as 1143 (see Darlington \ (1995, lxxx-lxxxi)). The entry for 1066 appears to rely mostly on \ versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and does not use Eadmer\'s \ Historia Novorum. Worcester\'s chronicle does make later use \ of Eadmer\'s work (starting with the entry for 1091), which could \ have been at Worcester as early as 1123; thus it is quite possible \ that the entry for 1066 was originally composed before 1123 (see \ Darlington (1995, \ lxxii-lxxiv)).
\All versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are excerpted \ from the translation by Whitelock (1986, 138-145). John of \ Worcester\'s version is excerpted from the translation in \ Darlington, R.R. and P. McGurk, ed. The Chronicle of John of \ Worcester, 450-1066. vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995, \ 598-607) © P. McGurk 1998, reproduced by permission of Oxford \ University Press.
\These versions have been interpolated by semantic blocks; \ passages from different versions grouped together and \ differentiated by color cover roughly the same material.
'; Carmnot='Notes: Carmen de Hastingae Proelio
\ \1. L. is commonly understood to represent Lanfranc, abbot of \ Caen until 1070 and then archbishop of Canterbury. W. is thought to \ represent Guy of Amiens (Wido); see Barlow (1999, \ xiv).
\ \2. Boreas, the greek god of the north wind.
\ \3. Guy alludes to the period of time when William\'s fleet waited \
at Dives-sur-Mer for a \
favorable wind before being blown north to St. \
Valery on the coast of Ponthieu. See Glossary: Channel \
Crossing.
\
-----
4. St. Valery and Vimeu were not in Normandy, but in Ponthieu, \ its northern, subinfeudated neighbor.
\ \5. I.e. the church which at that time held the relics of St. \ Valery (see Barlow (1999, 5, n. 6)).
\ \6. William\'s vow possibly alludes to the founding of a convent \ in England in 1068 as a cell of St. Valery (see Barlow (1999, \ 7, n. 4)). The festival of St. Michael was September 29th.
\ \7. Cf. panels 89 - 94.
\ \8. A line is missing in the MS.
\ \9. For the possible representation of a lantern on the mast of \ William\'s flagship in the Tapestry, see panel 98.
\ \10. For a representation of William\'s landing at Pevensey, see panels 102ff. For \ Halley\'s comet, cf. panel 75. Like the Hyde \ Chronicle (¶4), the Carmen \ misreports the date of the visibility of Halley\'s comet, which was \ visible in England in April and May of 1066, but not in \ September.
\ \11. Guy here refers to the invasion of northern England by \ Harold\'s brother, Tostig, and the Norwegian king Harald Hardrada. \ King Harold Godwinson defeated the combined forces at the Battle of Stamford \ Bridge, near York, on September 25, 1066. For \ accounts of this battle, see the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (¶3), \ Henry of Huntingdon\'s \ Historia Anglorum (¶3), and William of Malmesbury\'s Gesta \ Regum Anglorum (¶4).
\ \12. Cf. panels 114 - 116.
\ \13. Cf. panel 118.
\ \14. Cf. panels 105 - 109.
\ \15. I.e. Harald Hardrada and Tostig.
\ \16. Guy\'s figure is a rhetorical exaggeration; Harold likely was \ able to muster between eight and ten thousand troops. See \ Bachrach (1986, 2ff.) for a \ review of the evidence for the number of English and Norman troops \ involved at Hastings.
\ \17. Guy here either alludes to the tradition of Harold\'s \ oath-swearing to William (cf. panel 59) or, as Barlow (1999, \ 17, n. 3) surmises, as earl of Wessex and Kent, Harold is already \ the vassal to William, the rightful heir to the throne.
\ \18. Normans conquered most of southern Italy below Naples by \ 1059. The Norman invasion of Sicily began in 1061, and though the \ capital Palermo did not fall until 1072, and the domination was not \ complete until 1091, by 1068 substantial victories had been won \ there (see Brown (1984, 93-101)).
\Regarding Harold\'s adultery, Guy could be referring to Harold\'s \ "Danish marriage" to Edith Swan-neck, which was unrecognized by the \ Church and allowed him to marry another Edith, the sister of \ northern earls Edwin and Morcar, in 1066; or, as Barlow (1999, \ 17, n. 7) notes, Guy could be alluding to a possible promise by \ Harold to marry a daughter of Duke William (cf. panel 39).
\ \19. On Harold\'s oaths, see panel 59.
\ \20. William\'s great grandfather, Richard I (ruled 942-946), followed \ Rollo and William Longsword in the formation out of the Gaulish \ region of a robber state that became Normandy; William\'s \ grandfather, Richard II (ruled 996-1026), was \ implicated in Viking raids in Brittany as late as 1014, though his \ successor Robert was more successful in \ gaining Brittany\'s vassalage (see Le Patourel (1976, \ 14)); regarding William\'s father, Robert I (ruled 1027-1035), the \ matter is less sure -- Guy may be referring to Robert\'s attempted \ invasion of England in 1033-1034, or perhaps the fact that he \ harbored the future King Edward and his brother Alfred, in exile \ from England for all of his time in power.
\ \21. Archers make two appearances in the Tapestry, first \ supporting the initial Norman charge (see panel 141). In the \ later part of the battle, the archers make a second appearance and \ occupy the space of the lower border for a good number of panels. \ See panels 159ff.
\ \22. For a depiction of the Anglo-Saxon shield wall, see \ panels \ 145 - 146.
\ \23. For other accounts of Tallifer, see Wace (¶133), \ Henry of Huntingdon\'s \ Historia Anglorum (¶6), and Geoffrey Gaimar\'s L\'Estoire des \ Engleis (¶5).
\ \24. Cf. panel 144.
\ \25. Cf. panel 160.
\ \26. For Gyrth\'s death in the Tapestry, see \ panel \ 151.
\ \27. Helloc and his son remain unidentified. Barlow \ (2002, 107) posits that the decapitation scene in panel 166 may be a \ reference to this scene.
\ \28. For Eustace II, count of Boulogne, see Glossary: \ Eustace , and panel 161.
\ \29. For a representation of Harold\'s last stand, see \ panels \ 167 - 170, or Glossary: Death of \ Harold.
\ \30. Possibly Hugh of Ponthieu, Count Guy of \ Ponthieu\'s younger brother; if "the noble heir of \ Ponthieu" is an unnamed figure in addition to Hugh, the latter \ might be Hugh II of Montfort, listed by William Poitiers as one of \ the heroes of Hastings (see Library: William of Poitiers \ (¶41). See Barlow (1999, lxxxii) for \ commentary on this identification.
\ \31. Possibly the French baron Robert, son of Gilfard, or \ alternatively, Walter Giffard, count of Longueville, also listed by \ William Poitiers as one of the heroes of Hastings (see Library: William of \ Poitiers (¶41)). See Barlow (1999, \ lxxxii) for commentary on this identification.
\ \32. For the death of Harold in the Tapestry, which might echo \ Harold\'s wounding in the thigh, see panel 169.
\ \33. Cf. panels 171 - 173. "Actor\'s scion" \ could refer to the Hugh of the previous section (see above).
\ \34. Harold\'s mother, Gytha, was of Danish origins and withdrew \
from England in 1069, settling in Flanders. See Walker \
(1997, 192-193). Guy presumably refers also to Harold\'s brothers, \
Gyrth and Leofwine, also slain at Hastings (see \
panels \
151 - 152).
35. Possibly William Malet; see Library: William of Poitiers \ (¶45) and Chibnall (1998, 140, n. \ 2).
\ \36. Within two or three weeks of his victory at Hastings on \ October 14th, William won Dover and Canterbury without battle. See \ Douglas (1964, 396-400) for \ a chronology of the events after Hastings.
\ \37. The incident at Winchester is unattested elsewhere; see, \ however, Library: \ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (¶7) for an \ account of Edith\'s whereabouts after Hastings. As Barlow (1999, \ 37, n. 6) notes, Queen Edith, Edward\'s wife and Harold\'s \ sister, did settle profitably with William.
\ \38. Edgar Atheling, son of Edward the exile, grandson of Edmund \ Ironside, great-grandson of Æthelræd II (the \ Unready). In 1066, Edgar would have been around fifteen years of \ age.
\ \39. William took his time with regards to London. His forces \ actually circled around the city, first moving through territory to \ the north of London. William approached London by the middle of \ December; and despite Guy\'s elaborate descriptions of seige \ equipment below, the Normans likely entered the city with little \ serious opposition soon after, as most of the surviving English \ nobles, including Edgar Atheling, and the citizens of London, had \ already submitted to William at Berkhamstead, to the northwest of \ London, in early December (see Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶7, version D) and Douglas \ (1964, 396-400)).
\ \40. I.e. St. Peter\'s at Westminster; cf. panels 65 - 66 and \ Glossary: \ Westminster .
\ \41. This figure is named Ansgar, below, and identified by \ Barlow (1999, 41, n. 5) as Edgar \ the Staller, one of King Edward\'s court officials.
\ \42. It is unclear, and somewhat doubtful, that such a siege ever \ took place. William \ of Poitiers (¶51) states that London gave up \ without a fight upon William\'s arrival; see also Douglas \ (1964, 205-207).
\ \43. William was crowned on Christmas Day, December 25, 1066.
\ \44. On the materials of this crown, see Barlow (1999, \ 45, n. 6).
\ \45. Most sources report that Ealdred, the archbishop of York, \ crowned William.
\ \46. Cf. Harold\'s coronation in panel 72.
\ \47. Possibly Geoffrey of Mowbray, the bishop of Coutances, see \ William of \ Poitiers (¶54) and Barlow (1999, \ 49, n. 2).
\ \48. Cf. the applause at Harold\'s coronation in \ panel \ 73.
\ \49. Barlow (1999, xx, xc) believes \
that at least a line, and probably more, is missing from the end of \
the poem.
\
.
Bibliography:
\The full text of the Carmen survives in one manuscript, \ Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale MS 10615-729, ca. \ 1125-1135. A second manuscript, Brussels, Bibliothèque \ Royale MS 19799-809, containing the first sixty-six lines of the \ poem is most likely a direct copy of the first manuscript, made \ soon afterwards.
\Because of the long debate over the dating and authorship of the \ poem, there are numerous treatments of the poem and two full \ editions and translations from the late twentieth century. Frank \ Barlow\'s 1999 edition is the most recent, superceding the 1972 \ edition of Catherine Morton and Hope Muntz. For critical arguments \ against attributing the Carmen to Guy of Amiens, see White \ (1953), Davis (1978), and Owen (1982).
\===================
\Barlow, Frank, ed. The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio of \ Bishop Guy of Amiens. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999.
\Davis, R.H.C. "The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio." The \ English Historical Review 93.367 (1978): 241-61.
\_____. "The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio." Proceedings \ of the Battle Conference on Anglo-Norman Studies 2 (1980), \ 1-20, 165-167.
\Morton, Catherine, and Hope Muntz, ed. The Carmen de \ Hastingae Proelio of Guy of Amiens. Oxford: Clarendon Press, \ 1972.
\Orlandi, G. "Some Afterthoughts on the Carmen de Hastingae \ Proelio," Media Latinitas: a collection of essays to mark \ the occasion of the retirement of L.J. Engels ed. R.I.A. Nip \ et al. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 1996, 117-27.
\Owen, D.D.R. "The Epic and History: Chanson De Roland and \ Carmen de Hastingae Proelio." Medium Ævium LI.1 \ (1982): 18-34.
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M. C. "Latin Poetry and the Anglo-Norman \ Court, 1066-1035: The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio." Journal \ of Medieval History 15 (1989): 39-62.
\White, G.H. "The Battle of Hastings and the Death of Harold." \ The Complete Peerage 12 (1953), app. L.
'; var Carmabt='Guy of Amien\'s Carmen de Hastingae Proelio ("The song of the \ battle of Hastings")
\Introduction:
\
Though the Carmen has had a history of scholarly dissent \
over whether it was composed by Guy of Amiens ca. 1068-1070 \
or composed by an unknown poet in the mid-twelfth century, \
Barlow \
(1999, xxiv-xlii) notes that the majority of scholars favor the \
earlier dating, and provides emphatic refutations of arguments to \
the contrary. Though no definitive evidence has ever been \
discovered to assure the attribution of this poem to Guy of Amiens, \
this edition follows the arguments of both Barlow and the poem\'s \
previous editors, Hope Morton and Catherine Muntz ( Morton and Muntz \
(1972)).
Guy of Amiens was born c. 1014, the son of Enguerrand I, \ count of Ponthieu; he was also the uncle of Guy I, a subsequent \ count of Ponthieu who appears in the Tapestry. Guy became bishop of \ Amiens in 1058 and died ca. 1074-1075. Orderic Vitalis twice \ states that Guy authored a poem about the Battle of Hastings and \ sets the date of composition close to 1068 (see Barlow (1999, \ xiii-xix)). His Carmen is somewhat removed from the biases \ of the Norman accounts of the Conquest, but also more heavily \ emphasizes the role of Ponthieu and regional neighbors in the \ battle. Most recently, Barlow (1999, xc-xci) considers the poem \ to be the fons et origo of the entire family of near \ contemporary accounts of the Norman invasion and \ conquest.
\The version here is taken from the translation from Latin in \
Barlow, Frank, ed. The Carmen De Hastingae Proelio of \
Bishop Guy of Amiens. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999, 3-49. \
© copyright Frank Barlow 1999, by permission of Oxford \
University Press.
Notes: Brevis Relatio de Guillelmo nobilissimo comite \ Normannorum
\ \1. Cf. panels 13 - 28.
\ \2. Cf. panels 34 - 40.
\ \3. Cf. panel 59. Van \ Houts (1997, 16) notes that this is the earliest \ description of the relics upon which Harold swore. Bernstein (1986, 196-97) \ considers the possibility that the center stone on the right shrine \ in Harold\'s oath scene in panel 59 is the "bull\'s eye" mentioned \ here. For a similar account of this reliquary, see the Hyde Chronicle \ (¶1).
\ \4. Cf. panel 70. The split-scene depiction of \ Edward\'s deathbed episode and subsequent death mirrors the \ juxtapositioning of the events in the Brevis Relatio.
\ \5. Cf. panels 71 - 72. The Brevis \ Relatio here references an unidentified oral source as \ authority for this characterization of Harold as insane. It also is \ the only source to give St. Paul\'s as the location for Harold\'s \ coronation; other sources do not mention a location by name, but \ generally imply that Harold crowned himself where and when Edward \ was buried (i.e. St. Peter\'s at Westminster). Van \ Houts (1997, 16-17) considers the reference to \ St. Paul\'s Cathedral possibly an error based on an oral account, or \ an authorial error.
\ \6. Cf. panel 80 and the "Ship List of William the \ Conqueror" (¶2).
\ \7. Cf. panels 94 - 109. Literary accounts \ variously report that William landed at Pevensey on either September 28 or \ September 29. See also Glossary: The Norman \ Channel-Crossing.
\ \8. Cf. panels 109 - 114.
\ \9. The Battle of Stamford Bridge took place on \ September 25, 1066. During the fight, Harold\'s forces killed his \ brother Tostig and Harald Hardrada (mentioned here without \ explanation), and defeated their combined army.
\ \10. Cf. Proverbs, 16, 18.
\ \11. Cf. Psalms 13, 1 and Psalms 5, 10.
\ \12. Cf. William of Poitiers (¶33).
\ \13. Van \ Houts (1997, 16) notes that this is the oldest \ literary reference to Harold\'s standard. See also panel 168 for a \ depiction of Harold\'s standard.
\For scenes of Norman scouting reports, see panel 130.
\ \14. William of Poitiers and other chroniclers also describe the \ so-called "feigned flight" of the Normans. For a full discussion, \ see Brown (1981, 14-16).
\ \15. Cf. panels 171 - 173.
\ \16. For Harold\'s death, see panel 169. For the deaths of \ Gyrth and Leofwine, see panels 151 - \ 152.
\ \17. i.e. October 14, 1066. The abbey mentioned here is Battle \ Abbey, the monastery responsible for the composition of this \ account. See also the beginning of The Chronicle of Battle Abbey \ and William of \ Jumièges (¶8).
\ \18. i.e. December 25, 1066.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Elisabeth Van Houts bases her edition of the Brevis \ Relation on the oldest of four known manuscripts of the work, \ Bodleian Library MS E Museo 93 (ff. 1r-7v.), written in the \ 1120s.
\Van Houts\'s monograph supercedes J. Giles\' 1845 edition and is \ the only recent work on this text. Her edition, with the addition \ of a facing-page translation, is reprinted in her 1999 variorum, \ section VII (see below).
\===================
\Giles, J.A. ed. Scriptores Rerum Gestarum Willelmi \ Conquestoris. London: Caxton Society, 1845.
\Van Houts, Elisabeth M.C. ed. "The Brevis Relatio de \ Guillelmo nobilissimo comite Normannorum, Written by a Monk of \ Battle Abbey; Edited with an Historical Commentary." Chronology, \ Conquest and Conflict in Medieval England. Camden Miscellany \ XXXIV. Fifth ser. Vol 10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. \ 3-48.
\_____. History and Family Traditions in England and the \ Continent, 1000-1200. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999.
'; var Brevabt='Excerpt from the Brevis relatio de Guillelmo nobilissimo comite \ Normannorum ("A brief account of the most noble William, Duke \ of the Normans")
\Introduction:
\
The Brevis Relatio was composed between 1114 and 1120 by a \
monk, probably Norman, at Battle Abbey, which William founded on \
the site of his victory at Hastings. The Latin account, possibly \
based on the testimony of Abbot Ralph of Battle, is pro-Norman, \
makes references to the use of oral sources, and at several points \
contains strong similarities to the order of events as depicted in \
the Tapestry. See Van Houts (1997, 7ff.) for a full \
discussion of the text\'s dating, author, and manuscript \
history.
The version here is translated from the Latin in the edition by \ Van \ Houts (1997, 27-33) by Martin K. Foys and Bruce \ Boehrer.
'; var Bourgnot='Notes: Baudri de Bourgeuil\'s Adelae Comitissae
\ \1. The hanging (uelum, a term that could refer to a \ hanging of any type of material and format) in Adèle\'s \ bedroom, while similar in some of the narrative content to the \ Bayeux Tapestry, is much more ornate and precious in its \ materials.
\ \2. Baudri here refers to the turbulent nature of William\'s \
accession to the duchy of Normandy. When his father, Robert, died \
in 1035 during a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, William had to overcome \
his youth, his illegitimacy, and the ambitions of kinsmen and other \
barons to succeed him.
\
-----
3. Throughout the poem, Baudri exaggerates William\'s status from \
king to emperor.
\
-----
4. Cf. panel 75. Brown \ (1993, 59-60) compares the language of the Bayeux Tapestry\'s \ inscription to Baudri de Bourgeuil\'s description of the comet as \ stella, cometes, and miratur.
\ \5. Cf. panel 80. Brown \ (1993, 61) argues that the Bayeux Tapestry\'s representation of \ William\'s counsel and the subsequent scenes of ship-building is the \ only source that can explain the order of details included in this \ section of Baudri\'s poem.
\ \6. I.e. through William\'s relation to Edward\'s mother, \ Emma-Ælfgifu .
\ \7. No source attests to Edward issuing on his deathbed a written \ confirmation of William\'s claim to the English throne. Baudri could \ be referring to Norman claims that Edward had earlier sent \ representatives to William to confirm his claim. See, for instance, \ William of \ Poitiers (¶30).
\ \8. Cf. panel 59.
\ \9. William subjugated the neighboring region of Maine in \ 1063.
\Puglia, or Apulia, is a southeastern mainland region of Italy \ conquered by Robert Guiscard in the late 1050s. By 1059, Robert \ Guiscard, a Norman immigrant from the house of Hautville, had \ become duke of both Apulia and Calabria; by 1072, he was proclaimed \ duke of Sicily as well. In 1084, his troops sacked Rome even while \ allied with the Pope and turning back the forces of the German \ Emperor. Robert died in 1085, at age 70, while on yet another \ campaign, against Byzantium. See Brown (1984, 89-102).
\ \10. Baudri refers to William\'s long-standing territorial \ disputes with the neighboring region of Anjou. A combined force \ under the Angevin count Geoffrey Martel and King Henry I was \ defeated at the Battle of Mortemer in 1054; however, from 1072 \ onward, counts of Anjou continued to place pressure on the \ frontiers of Norman holdings.
\ \11. Cf. panels 80 - 87. Baudri\'s text is the \ only literary treatment of the Conquest to parallel the Tapestry\'s \ attention to the construction of the invasion fleet. See also \ Brown (1993, 62-63).
\ \12. Baudri\'s figure of ships is greatly exaggerated. \
Gillmor (1996, 114-15) \
examines all accounts of the Norman fleet and calculates that the \
fleet numbered somewhere around 700 vessels. See also Glossary: Norman \
Shipbuilding.
13. For a representation of William\'s flagship, see panel 98.
\ \14. I.e. Troy.
\ \15. Baudri anticipates William\'s victory and becoming king of \ the English.
\ \16. Baudri significantly collapses the time between William\'s \ landing and the engagement with the English.
\ \17. For a depiction of the Anglo-Saxon shield wall, see \ panels \ 145 - 146.
\ \18. Archers make two appearances in the Tapestry, first \ supporting the initial Norman charge (see panel 141). In the \ later part of the battle, the archers make a second appearance and \ occupy the space of the lower border for a good number of panels. \ See panels 159ff.
\ \19. Baudri\'s claim that few Normans fell in the initial attack, \ compared to the English losses, closely echoes the Tapestry, where \ few, if any, Normans fall at the beginning of the battle.
\ \20. Cf. panel 160.
\ \21. Baudri\'s description of Harold\'s death by arrow closely \ parallels the Tapestry\'s representation of the death of a figure \ often thought to be Harold (see panel 169). Brown \ (1993, 66) argues on this basis that "Baudri used the Bayeux \ Tapestry and no other source for his description of Harold\'s \ death," and that the poet quite possibly misread the Tapestry\'s \ depiction of Harold\'s death in doing so. See also Brooks \ (1978, 25-34).
\ \22. Cf. panels 171 - 173.
\ \23. Within two weeks of his victory at Hastings, William \ attacked Romney, and won Dover and Canterbury without battle. By \ mid-December he had cut London off from the rest of England and \ soon after was able to enter the city with little or no resistance. \ See also Glossary: The End of the Tapestry. See \ Douglas (1964, 396-400) for \ a chronology of the events after Hastings.
\ \24. Another reference to Halley\'s comet; cf. panel 75.
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\Michael Herren provides a translation, without editorial \ commentary, of the section of the "Adelae Comitissae" pertaining to \ the Bayeux Tapestry in Brown (1988, 167-177). Brown (1993, 55-73) \ provides a complete bibliography and comprehensive discussion of \ this section in relation to the Bayeux Tapestry.
\===================
\Abrahams, P, ed. Les Îuvres Poétics de Baudri de \ Bourgeuil. Paris: Librarie Ancienne Honore Champion, 1926 \ (repr; Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1974), no. cxcvi, 196-253.
\Brooks, N.P and H.E. Walker. "The Authority and Interpretation \ of the Bayeux Tapestry." The Proceedings of the Battle \ Conference I (1978): 1-34, esp. 26-28.
\Brown, Shirley Ann. The Bayeux Tapestry, History and \ Bibliography. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1988.
\Brown, Shirley Ann and Michael W. Herren. "The Adelae \ Comitissae of Baudri of Bourgeuil and the Bayeux Tapestry." \ Anglo-Norman Studies XVI (1993): 55-73.
\Grape, Wolfgang. The Bayeux Tapestry: Monument to a Norman \ Triumph. Trans. David Britt. Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1994, \ 61.
\Lauer, Phillipe. "Le Poème de Baudri de Bourgeuil \ adressé à Adèle, fille de Guillaume le \ Conquérant, et la date de la Tapisserie de Bayeux." \ Mélanges d\'Histoire offerts à M. Charles \ Bemont. Paris: F. Alcan, 1913, 43-58.
\Werckmeister, O.K. "The Political Ideology of the Bayeux \ Tapestry." Studi Medievali 17.2 (1976): 535-95, esp. \ 554-63.
'; var Bourgabt='Excerpt from Baudri de Bourgeuil\'s Adelae Comitissae ("To \ Countess Adèle")
\Introduction:
\
Baudri of Bourgeuil was born in 1046 in Meung, then part of the \
royal domain of France, and studied in Orléans. He became \
abbot of Bourgeuil in 1078, and archbishop of Dol, in Brittany, in \
1107. He died in 1130.
Baudri\'s Adelae Comitissae, a 1300-line poetic tribute to \ Adèle, William the Conqueror\'s daughter, and William \ himself, was composed ca. 1099-1102. Over one-quarter of the \ work (ll. 207-572) describes a wall-hanging in the countess\'s \ bedroom which depicts the Norman Conquest and bears some similarity \ to the Bayeux Tapestry, though it only mentions some of the \ significant scenes found in the textile. Brown (1993, 55-73) \ thoroughly reviews the "Adelae Comitissae" in light of the Tapestry \ and argues that Baudri had carefully studied the Tapestry for the \ composition of the poem.
\The version here is excerpted from Michael Herren\'s translation \
of the Latin in <font color="#000000">Brown (1988, 167-177). Line numbers are \
listed in red italics.
\
\
Published by permission of Boydell & Brewer.
Notes for the Chronicle of Battle Abbey:
\ \1. Rollo, the first Duke of the Normans, who founded Normandy \ c. 911.
\ \2. Cf. panels 80ff.
\ \3. The manuscript here is incomplete in several places, with \ omissions of one to three words in each case. These caesurae are \ probably due to illegibility in the original. See Searle \ (1980, 26 and 34, notes b and c).
\For the Norman landing at Pevensey, see panels 102ff.
\ \4. William fitz Osbern was the son of Osbern of Crepon, steward \ of Normandy himself, and Emma, daughter of Raoul, count of Ivry. He \ was also a cousin of Duke William, who made him earl of Hereford \ shortly after the Conquest.
\ \5. Cf. panels 114 - 116.
\ \6. See Wace (¶52) and the Hyde \ Chronicle (¶9) for other mentions of this \ unlikely detail. Taylor (1975, 130, n. 1) \ posits that the idea that William ordered his fleet destroyed could \ have arisen from the Tapestry\'s representation of the unstepping of \ masts upon landing (see panel 103).
\ \7. Cf. panel 117.
\ \8. See also William of Poitiers (¶33) and \ Wace (¶102).
\ \9. The chronicle\'s account of William of Marmoutier is unique. \ Upon its founding, Battle Abbey was staffed with monks of \ Marmoutier, and the chronicle later reports that King William first \ placed this monk in charge of managing the abbey.
\ \10. The chronicler here refers to a section of Geoffrey of \ Monmouth\'s prophecies of Merlin in his History of the Kings of \ Britain (vii.3): "The decimation by Normandy will be a sorry \ blow / There shall come a people dressed in wood and in iron \ corselets who will take vengeance . . ." See Thorpe \ (1966, 173).
\ \11. The manuscript is damaged in this section, making the \ reading of some words conjectural. See Searle \ (1980, 38) for details.
\For Eustace II, count of Boulogne, see Glossary: \ Eustace, and panel 161.
\ \12. For Harold\'s death in the Tapestry, and the subsequent \ flight of English troops, see panels 169 - 173.
\ \13. The Battle chronicle is the only text to give the name \ Malfosse. For a discussion of this scene, and arguments that \ it is also represented in the Tapestry, see panel 157.
\ \14. The chronicle\'s estimation of casualties are somewhat \ inflated, as in all likelihood only 14,000 troops fought on both \ sides. The carnage was great, however; Wright \ (1996, 103) estimates some 6,000 human and 600 equine casualties, \ and calculates that on the ridge of the battle, there were "at \ least six human bodies and a horse for every yard of hill."
\ \15. For the English standard, see panel 168.
\ \16. William\'s coronation was on Christmas Day, 1066. The Battle \ chronicler dates the new year from December 25 (i.e. Christmas \ style).
\
\
.
Bibliography:
\The Battle Abbey chronicle survives in a single manuscript, \ British Library MS Cotton Domitian Aii. It was most likely composed \ between the years 1155 and 1185 on the premises of Battle \ Abbey.
\Eleanor Searle\'s translation and edition is the only recent and \ comprehensive treatment of this text.
\===================
\Davis, H.W.C. "The Chronicle of Battle Abbey." English \ Historical Review 29 (1914): 426-34.
\Searle, Eleanor, "Battle Abbey and exemption: the forged \ charters." English Historical Review 83 (1968): 449-80.
\_____, ed. The Chronicle of Battle Abbey. Oxford: \ Clarendon, 1980.
'; var Battabt='Excerpt from the Chronicle of Battle Abbey
\Introduction:
\
The first section of the anonymous Chronicle of Battle Abbey \
was composed ca. 1155-1184. Though late as an account of the \
events of the Norman Conquest, the Chronicle of Battle Abbey \
is valuable as the source literally closest to the Battle of \
Hastings, as the abbey was ordered by William to be built upon the \
spot where Harold fell. The account of the battle, though brief, \
provides a number of names and details not found elsewhere and is \
notable for its explicit recognition of oral tradition.
The version here is excerpted from the translation of the Latin \ is excerpted from Searle, Eleanor, The Chronicle of Battle \ Abbey. Oxford: Clarendon, 1980, 32-41. © Oxford University \ Press 1980, reproduced by permission of Oxford University \ Press.
'; var library = new Array (); library["Ed"]={"ref":"Ed", "label":"Vita Edwardi", "catalogue":"Vita Edwardi","short":"" }; library["Ed"].short='The Vita Aedwardi, a hagiographical vita in Latin attributed to an \ unknown monk of Saint-Berlin, was most likely begun c. 1065 and finished in 1067. \ The description of King Edward\'s deathbed scene closely parallels the depiction \ of the same event in the Tapestry.'; library["Chron"]={"ref":"Chron", "label":"ASC/John of Worcester", "catalogue":"Anglo-Saxon Chronicles/John of Worcester","short":"" }; library["Chron"].short='Versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are the only contemporary English \ accounts of the events leading up to and including the Battle of Hastings. \ John of Worcester\'s later Chronicon ex Chronicis, a Latin history of the world \ extending until 1140, used one or more versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a source, \ though with some substantial additions.'; library["Carm"]={"ref":"Carm", "label":"Guy of Amiens", "catalogue":"Guy of Amiens' Carmen de Hastingae Proelio","short":"" }; library["Carm"].short='Bishop Guy of Amiens\' Carmen is somewhat removed from the biases of the \ Norman accounts of the Conquest, but also more heavily emphasizes the role of Ponthieu and \ other regional neighbors of Normandy in the battle. As an arguably very early source (c. 1068), \ this poem may be a source for almost every other contemporary Norman account of the \ Battle of Hastings.'; library["Ship"]={"ref":"Ship", "label":"William's Ship List", "catalogue":'"The Ship List of William the Conqueror"',"short":"" }; library["Ship"].short='The "Ship List of William the Conqueror" is a brief list of Norman nobles \ and the number of ships and troops they pledged to William for his invasion of England. \ Though copied in the mid-twelfth century, the "Ship List" is believed to have been written within \ five years of the Conquest.'; library["Jum"]={"ref":"Jum", "label":"William of Jumièges", "catalogue":"William of Jumièges' Gesta Normannorum Ducum","short":"" }; library["Jum"].short='The Norman monk William of Jumièges\' Gesta Normannorum Ducum was written \ c. 1070, one of the earliest sources of the Norman Conquest. William\'s account \ works to legitimize King William\'s accession to the English throne, and \ undoubtedly incorporates local details into his collation of written sources. \ Though curt in description, its outline of the events of 1064-66 bears a close \ resemblance to the framework of the Bayeux Tapestry. '; library["Poit"]={"ref":"Poit", "label":"William of Poitiers", "catalogue":"William of Poitiers' Gesta Guillielmi","short":"" }; library["Poit"].short='William of Poitiers was one of William the Conqueror\'s chaplains. \ His Gesta Regum Anglorum was written ca. 1067-1077 and blends classical allusions \ with oral accounts and specific military details. Poitiers\' account of William\'s \ Breton Campaign and the Battle of Hastings is the most detailed contemporary report surviving.'; library["Mont"]={"ref":"Mont", "label":"Amato of Montecassino", "catalogue":"Amato of Montecassino's L'Ystoire de li Normani","short":"" }; library["Mont"].short='Amato was a monk at the monastery of Montecassino in Norman Italy who \ wrote a history of the Normans sometime between 1080 and 1089. Though his reference to \ William, Harold and the Battle of Hastings is brief, and exaggerated in detail, it is \ notable as an attestation that Harold was killed by an arrow in his eye that considerably \ predates other accounts of this detail (except, of course, possibly the Tapestry).'; library["Bourg"]={"ref":"Bourg", "label":"Baudri of Bourgueil", "catalogue":"Baudri de Bourgueil's Adelae Comitessae","short":"" }; library["Bourg"].short='Baudri of Bourgeuil\'s Adelae Comitissae, a 1300 line poetic \ tribute to Adèle, William the Conqueror\'s daughter, was composed ca. 1099-1102. \ Over one-quarter of the work describes a wall-hanging in the countess\'s bedroom which \ depicts the Norman Conquest and bears some similarity to the Bayeux Tapestry, though it \ only mentions some of the significant scenes found in the textile.'; library["Brev"]={"ref":"Brev", "label":"Brevis Relatio", "catalogue":"Brevis Relatio de Guillelmo","short":"" }; library["Brev"].short='The Brevis Relatio was composed between 1114 and 1120 by a monk, \ probably Norman, at Battle Abbey, which William founded on the site of his victory at Hastings. \ The Latin account is pro-Norman, makes references to the use of oral sources, and at several points \ contains strong similarities to the order of events as depicted in the Tapestry.'; library["Eadm"]={"ref":"Eadm", "label":"Eadmer of Canterbury", "catalogue":"Eadmer of Canterbury's Historia Novorum in Anglia","short":"" }; library["Eadm"].short='In conjunction with his biography of Anselm, Eadmer of Canterbury wrote the \ first four books of Historia Novorum in Anglia ca.1109-1115. Eadmer was born in England \ shortly before the Conquest, and his writings are usually thought to contain implicit \ Anglo-Saxon sympathies. '; library["Malm"]={"ref":"Malm", "label":"William of Malmesbury", "catalogue":"William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum","short":"" }; library["Malm"].short='William of Malmesbury, an Anglo-Norman cleric, completed the first draft of \ his five part Latin history Gesta Regum Anglorum, c. 1125. Commissioned by Queen Matilda, his \ work, at times heavily embellished, draws from a wide variety of classical, scriptural and \ contemporary sources, and portrays both English and Normans in sympathetic lights.'; library["Ord"]={"ref":"Ord", "label":"Orderic Vitalis", "catalogue":"Orderic Vitalis's Historia Ecclesiastica","short":"" }; library["Ord"].short='Orderic Vitalis, an Anglo-Norman cleric, finished the first part of his \ Historia Æcclesiastica around 1124. His report of the Battle of Hastings borrows \ heavily from both William of Poitiers and William of Jumièges, but also shows evidence of other \ otherwise unknown sources.'; library["Hunt"]={"ref":"Hunt", "label":"Henry of Huntingdon", "catalogue":"Henry of Huntingdon's Historia Anglorum","short":"" }; library["Hunt"].short='Henry of Huntingdon, an Anglo-Norman, completed the first seven books of his \ ten book Historia Anglorum by 1133. Comissioned by Bishop Alexander of Lincoln, the history \ was designed to be accessible to a less-educated audience. Henry\'s account of the Conquest draws \ from most heavily from English sources, but is unabashedly pro-Norman and rife with anti-Harold \ sentiment.'; library["Hyde"]={"ref":"Hyde", "label":"The Hyde Chronicle", "catalogue":"The Hyde Chronicle","short":"" }; library["Hyde"].short='The so-called Hyde Chronicle, probably a Norman composition from around 1130, \ is noted for its reference to many unidentified oral sources, and particular details \ regarding Harold\'s oaths to William and the king\'s actions leading up to Hastings.'; library["Gaim"]={"ref":"Gaim", "label":"Geffrei Gaimar", "catalogue":"Geffrei Gaimar's L'Estoire des Engleis","short":"" }; library["Gaim"].short='Geffrey Gaimar\'s poem L\'Estoire Des Engleis was written in England \ around 1135-1140. His work draws on a wide variety of English sources, including one or two versions \ of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. For his account of the Conquest, he probably used eye-witness \ accounts and personal experiences as well.'; library["Wace"]={"ref":"Wace", "label":"Wace", "catalogue":"Wace's Roman de Rou et des ducs de Normandie","short":"" }; library["Wace"].short='Wace\'s Roman de Rou, ca. 1170, is one of the latest literary analogues in \ this edition. Written four generations after Hastings, much of Wace\'s material likely relies on \ oral traditions which have begun to drift into fictive legend. However, Wace\'s account bears \ striking similarities to parts of the Tapestry; as canon of Bayeux, there is a strong possibility \ that Wace consulted the Tapestry for his own writing.'; library["Batt"]={"ref":"Batt", "label":"Battle Abbey Chronicle", "catalogue":"The Chronicle of Battle Abbey","short":"" }; library["Batt"].short='Though late as a source for the events of the Norman Conquest, the chronicle \ of Battle Abbey (composed between 1155-1184) is valuable as the source literally closest to the \ Battle of Hastings, as the abbey was ordered by William to be built upon the spot where Harold \ fell. The brief account of the battle provides a number of names and details not found elsewhere and \ is notable for its explicit recognition of oral tradition.'; var people = new Array (); people["AElfgyva"]={"ref":"AElfgyva","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"AElfgyva"}; people["AElfgyva"].html='Ælfgyva (Ælfgÿva)
\The identity of Ælfgyva, the robed woman in panel 39, has \ never been definitively settled. Scholars have variously identified \ her as one of several Anglo-Saxon noblewomen, a relation of Harold \ or William, or even Queen Matilda. The inclusion of this figure has \ been related to William’s imminent Breton campaign, marriage \ arrangements between Harold and William, William\'s claim to the \ English throne, and a local, now obscure, tradition of sexual \ scandal. For a comprehensive survey of scholarship related to \ Ælfgyva, and a discussion of all proposed candidates, see the \ commentary for panel 39.
\Index: Ælfgyva, panel \ 39.
'; people["Conan"]={"ref":"Conan","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Conan"}; people["Conan"].html='Conan II, Count of Brittany (Cunan)
\Conan was count of Brittany during the time of William\'s \ rule. While Brittany was partially subservient to Normandy during \ this period, many local rulers rebelled against Norman rule. In \ 1064, William invaded Brittany to subdue Conan, who, following in \ the footsteps of his father, Alain, had announced his intention to \ cross the frontiers of Normandy. Conan reportedly attacked Dol, a \ Breton city in his domain whose leader, Rivallon of \ Cambour, remained loyal to William.
\In the Tapestry, panels 46 - 54 cover the campaign \ against Conan, who is first shown occupying and fleeing Dol, and \ then surrendering in his citadel of Dinan. \ Importantly, the Tapestry\'s version of these events conflicts with \ William of Poitiers\' account of the same campaign (Library: \ Poitiers (¶5ff.)). For more discussion of this \ expedition, see Glossary: William\'s Breton Campaign. \ Douglas (1964, 178) has a convenient \ summary of Conan II and the political situation in \ Brittany.
\Index: Conan, flees Dol, panel 47, \ Museum: Escaping \ by Rope; surrenders keys to William at Dinan, \ panel \ 52.
'; people["Edith"]={"ref":"Edith","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Edith"}; people["Edith"].html='Edith, Queen of England
\The eldest sister of Harold, and perhaps the eldest child of \ the Godwin family, Edith was educated at Wilton Abbey and married \ King \ Edward in 1045. As the queen of England, she no \ doubt helped advance her brothers\' positions, and by 1065 she was \ the third wealthiest person in England, behind only her husband and \ her brother Harold.
\However, Edith and Edward never produced an heir to the \ English throne, and some scholars have speculated that by 1050 \ Edward, now secure in his power and no longer reliant upon the \ Godwin family, wished to push Earl Godwin from power and divorce \ Edith to marry anew (cf. Walker (1997, 27)). However, Godwin did \ not fall from power, and Edward and Edith remained married despite \ the lack of an heir until Edward\'s death in \ 1065.
\Though she is not named in the scene, Edith most likely appears \ at the foot of Edward\'s deathbed in panel 70 of the Tapestry, a scene \ likely modeled on the description of Edward\'s death presented in \ the anonymous Vita Ædwardi, which Edith commissioned \ (Library: Vita \ Edwardi (¶3)).
\After the Conquest, Queen Edith, perhaps because of her marriage \ to Edward, was not forced into exile, but rather spent the rest of \ her life at her lands in Winchester and Wilton, uninvolved in any \ of the subsequent English rebellions. Edith died in 1075.
\See also DeVries (1999, 117-122) and \ Stafford \ (1997, 255-279).
\Index: Edith, at Edward\'s deathbed, panel 70.
'; people["Edward"]={"ref":"Edward","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Edward the Confessor"}; people["Edward"].html='Edward the Confessor, King of England \ (Eadwardus)
\King and Saint Edward the Confessor was born between 1002 \ and 1005 and died on Jan. 5, 1066. He was the next to last \ Anglo-Saxon king of England. His reign (1042-66) also prepared the \ way for the Normanization of England under William the Conqueror. \ During his reign, Edward did much to allow Norman culture to enter \ Anglo-Saxon England, including rebuilding Westminster \ Abbey as the first example of Norman Architecture on \ the island.
\The son of King Æthelred II and \ Emma-Ælgifu, Edward was raised at \ the ducal court of Normandy and during his twenty-five year exile \ there developed pro-Norman sympathies. See the Genealogy entry for \ Emma-Ælfgifu for more background to the political situation \ of Edward\'s childhood. The Vita Ædwardi describes \ Edward in the same stereotypical fashion shown in the Tapestry: "he \ was a very proper figure of a man -- of outstanding height, and \ distinguished by his milky white hair and beard, full face and rosy \ cheeks, thin white hands and long translucent fingers" (Barlow \ (1992, 19)).
\Brown (1977, 140-141) views the \ Tapestry\'s depiction of Edward as "based upon the hagiographical \ image of the king, rather than upon a knowledge of the sovereign \ who had actually been vigorous in life, who had enjoyed hunting \ during his last year, and who had unexpectedly become ill and \ dies." Barlow, cited in Wilson (1985, 15-16), notes that Edward \ the saint and Edward the friend of Normandy are essentially both \ the creation of post-Conquest Norman propaganda.Without the \ pro-Norman climate, Barlow argues, Edward would have been largely \ forgotten. Likewise Keynes (1991, 173) notes the tendency \ of Anglo-Norman rulers to bolster their rule through affirmation of \ respect for "the laws of King Edward."
\The most complete discussion of King Edward and his life remains \ Barlow (1979).
\Index: Edward the Confessor, with Harold, panel 1, panel 65, \ Museum: King \ Edward\'s Seal; death of, panels 68-70.
'; people["Eustace"]={"ref":"Eustace","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Eustace"}; people["Eustace"].html='Eustace, Count of Boulogne (Eustatius \ (?))
\Count Eustace of Boulogne was brother-in-law to King \ Edward and an important contributor to the Norman victory at \ Hastings. Eustace is mentioned by several contemporary or \ near-contemporary reports of the battle, including Carmen de \ Hastingae Proelio (Library: Carmen (¶29 ff.)), \ William of Poitiers (Library: Poitiers (¶44)), and the \ Chronicle of Battle Abbey (Library: Battle Abbey (¶5)), and \ is probably (though not definitely) shown in panel 161 of the \ Tapestry.
\Several scholars have pointed out Eustace\'s prior \ involvement with English affairs. Thorpe \ (1973, 13) follows the entry for 1051 in the D and E versions of \ the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (see Whitelock (1986, 117-122)) which \ records an incident in which Eustace and his troops, while visiting \ King Edward, came into conflict with local officials at Dover. \ Subsequently, Edward ordered Earl Godwin, Harold\'s father, to \ punish the English involved. Godwin, however, refused, \ precipitating the brief exile of the Godwin family. See Douglas \ (1964, 168-69) for a full account of this matter and its political \ implications.
\William of Poitiers (see Chibnall (1998, 182-185)) reports that \ in 1067 Eustace attempted and quickly aborted an invasion of \ England at Dover. In relation to this, Morton and \ Muntz (1972, xxii-xxiii) note that Eustace was \ married to Godgifu, daughter of Emma-Ælfgifu \ and King \ Æthelred, and may have considered himself a \ legitimate heir to the throne. However, see Barlow (1979, 307-308) \ for a contrary argument that Eustace brought with him a pretender \ to the throne.
\Brown (1977, 29, 145-146) observes that \ Poitiers shows Eustace in a less than favorable light at Hastings, \ perhaps foreshadowing the count\'s subsequent and treacherous \ invasion at Dover. She also suggests that the Tapestry invokes a \ "political typology" which attempts to refute such depictions and \ to establish Eustace as a heroic figure forgiven for his later \ crimes. Bachrach (1987, 18) suggests that \ Bishop \ Odo included Eustace in the Tapestry because he \ considered him part of an important factio in post-Conquest \ political struggles. Bridgeford (1999, 161ff.) presents a \ detailed account of Eustace\'s political activities and their \ relation to the Bayeux Tapestry, and pre- and post-Conquest events. \ He especially notes that Dover Castle was Odo\'s castle, and \ contends that Eustace created the Tapestry for Odo as a form \ of reconciliation for the attack and possibly to secure the release \ of one or more of his relatives captured during the conflict. The \ favorable depiction of Eustace in the Tapestry has also served as a \ basis for a terminus post quo for dating the work (see \ Introduction: \ Dating). See also the discussion of the probable \ representation of Eustace in panel 161.
\For a complete review of Eustace\'s life, see Tanner \ (1992, 251-86).
\Index: Eustace, at Hastings(?), rallying his own \ Franco-Flemish line(?) panel 161.
'; people["Guy"]={"ref":"Guy","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Guy"}; people["Guy"].html='Guy, Count of Ponthieu (Wido)
\Guy was count of Ponthieu from 1053 to 1100. When Harold \ landed in Ponthieu in 1064, Guy captured and possibly imprisoned \ him (see panels 13 - 21). Guy was a Gaul, and a \ former enemy and prisoner of Duke William for supporting the king \ of France\'s war on William in 1054. Also, one of Guy\'s brothers and \ predecessors, Enguerrand II, was killed during a siege in which he \ supported the French King Henry in an action against William. \ However, Guy eventually became a Norman vassal, and therefore was \ obligated to release Harold to William (see panels 31 - 32). \ Further evidence of Guy\'s allegiance to William may be deduced from \ the Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (Library: \ Carmen (¶30)), which reports that Guy de \ Ponthieu\'s son and heir, Hugh, commanded a troop of men at Hastings \ and was possibly one of the four men responsible for the death of \ Harold at the Battle of Hastings.
\Though most of the annals mention Guy as Harold\'s captor, \ little more is said of him. The makers of the Tapestry held him to \ be an aristocrat of some degree; however, he is shown in panel 22 as \ wearing a distinctive, triangle-patterned tunic. Only two other \ figures in the Tapestry wear this type of clothing: Bishop Odo in \ panel \ 158, and King William in panel 42 (cf. Museum: \ Triangle-patterned Armor). As a point of interest, \ Guy de Ponthieu was the nephew of Bishop Guy of Amiens, purported \ author of the Carmen de Hastingae Proelio, and brother of \ Hugh II, the count\'s father and a former ruler of Ponthieu. For \ further background on Guy, see Douglas \ (1964, 67, 176-177) and Morton and Muntz (1972, \ xxx-xxxv).
\Index: Guy of Ponthieu, captures Harold, panel 14, \ panels 17 \ - 18, panel 20, panel 22; \ releases Harold to William, panel 31.
'; people["Gyrth"]={"ref":"Gyrth","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Gyrth"}; people["Gyrth"].html='Gyrth (Gyrð)
\A younger brother of Harold \ Godwinson, Gyrth was born c. 1032 \ (Barlow \ (1992, 8, n. 10)), and became earl of East Anglia c. 1057. \ Little else is known about Gyrth before 1066, other than that he \ accompanied his father to Bruges during the Godwins\' brief exile in \ 1051-1052, and that he returned there in 1061, while escorting his \ brother Tostig on a trip to Rome. Given the silence of the literary \ sources, it is assumed that both he and his brother Leofwine supported King Edward\'s exile \ of their brother Tostig, and their other brother Harold\'s quest for \ kingship.
\Most literature of the Conquest notes Gyrth\'s death at Hastings, \ as does the Tapestry in panel 151. Some sources embellish \ Gyrth\'s role, depicting him in personal battle with William \ (e.g. Library: \ Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (¶26)); late \ sources show him alternately arguing with brother Harold and \ providing him with caution and courage before the battle \ (e.g. Library: \ Wace (¶75ff.) and then Wace \ (¶119ff.)). Barlow (2002, 99) notes that the late \ and untrustworthy source of De Inventione Sanctae Crucis \ places Gyrth at the Battle of Stamford Bridge as well. \ Barlow (112) further notes that after Hastings no church claimed \ his body, and if unmarried, he was likely left to rot.
\Cf. DeVries (1999, 114-115).
\Index: Gyrth, death of, panel 151.
'; people["Hakon"]={"ref":"Hakon","html":"", "gif":"0", "caption":"Hakon"}; people["Hakon"].html='Hakon (sometimes spelled "Hacon")
\Though Hakon does not explicitly appear in the Tapestry, \ he may be an integral player in some of the scenes. Hakon, the son \ of Swain (brother of Harold), was, according to Eadmer of \ Canterbury (Library: \ Eadmer (¶3)), one of the two hostages held by \ Duke William to insure Earl Godwin\'s loyalty to King Edward in \ 1051. One of possible reasons for Harold\'s voyage to Normandy in \ 1064 was the release of Hakon and Wulfnoth, a son of Earl Godwin \ (cf. Glossary: Harold\'s Mission to \ Normandy). William of Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶9)) mentions these hostages, though \ not by name, and states that Harold\'s nephew (that is, Hakon) was \ released by William and returned with Harold to England (see \ commentary for panel 61). Barlow \ (2002, 93) records that the fate of Hakon remains \ unknown.
\Wissolik (1979, 80 ff.) argues that the \ Tapestry contains secret codes which clue the viewer into the more \ "English" side of Harold\'s visit, including visual and linguistic \ clues showing the release of Hakon. See the commentary for panel 3, panel 38, \ panel 39 \ and panel \ 61 for more details. For a full discussion of Hakon and the hostage \ episode, see Freeman (1875, 683-686). Freeman \ (769-70) also studies the episode shown in panel 150 and \ identifies Hakon as one of a "family gathering" of five Godwins -- \ Ælfwig, Harold, Gyrth, Leofwine, and Hakon.
\Index: Hakon, possible representations of, panel 3, panel 38, \ panel 39, \ panel 61, \ and panel 150; cf. Glossary: Harold\'s \ Mission to Normandy.
'; people["Harold"]={"ref":"Harold","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Harold II"}; people["Harold"].html='Harold II, Earl of Wessex, King of England \ (Harold)
\The last Anglo-Saxon king of England, Harold was born \ c. 1022, and was defeated and killed in 1066 at the Battle \ of Hastings by the Normans under William the Conqueror. Harold \ succeeded his father Godwin in 1053 to the powerful \ earldom of Wessex and succeeded to the throne of England on King \ Edward\'s death in January,1066.
\Maclagan (1949, 7) suggests that the \ Tapestry portrays Harold "not as a Judas . . . though perhaps as a \ Macbeth; a brave man led by ambition into disloyalty." In a similar \ fashion, Bernstein (1986, 122-123) reads \ Harold\'s depiction in the Tapestry sympathetically, and sees him as \ a tragic, not contemptible, figure, a heroic man caught between \ conflicted loyalties. Loyn (1966, 4) notes that the Tapestry \ is the only contemporary source which shows Harold as a combination \ of virtue and vice and that "the English sources generally idealize \ him, while the Norman sources generally vilify him." Cowdrey \ (1997, 96-97) notes that Harold\'s name appears in the Tapestry \ twenty-three times, compared to William\'s name, which appears \ seventeen times. He also (98ff.) argues that the central narrative \ of the Tapestry depicts Harold as a chevalier sans peur et sans \ reproche while the fables hint at his treachery, and later \ (108-09) contends that as after the Conquest the Normans depended \ in part on Anglo-Saxons for military service, it is not \ inconceivable that the Tapestry was also designed to honor a heroic \ memory of Harold.
\Loyn (1966) is a detailed introduction \ to the life and person of Harold Godwinson, though it has recently \ been superceded by the lengthier Walker \ (1997) and Barlow (2002, 51-111).
\Index: Harold Godwinson, with Edward, panel 1, panel 64; in \ Bosham, panels 2 - 4, panel 5; sea \ voyage to Normandy of, panels 9 - 12, Glossary: Harold\'s \ Mission to Normandy; captured by Guy, panel 13, \ panel 18, \ panel 20, \ panel 30; \ with William, panel 35, panel 37; with \ William in Brittany, panel 43(?), panel 45; in \ arms-giving scene, panel 55; swears oath to William, \ panel 59; \ travels to London, panel 63; at Edward\'s deathbed, \ panel 70; \ crowned king, panel 72; under Halley\'s comet, \ panel 75; \ receives news of William\'s army at Hastings, panel 132; death \ of, panel 169, Glossary: Death of \ Harold.
'; people["Leofwine"]={"ref":"Leofwine","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Leofwine"}; people["Leofwine"].html='Leofwine (Lewine) \The second youngest brother of Harold \ Godwinson, Leofwine was born c. 1035 \ (Barlow \ (1992, 8, n. 10)) and became earl of the East Midlands c. \ 1057-1058. Little else is known about Leofwine before 1066, other \ than that he accompanied his brother Harold to Ireland during the \ Godwins\' brief exile in 1051-1052. Given the silence of the \ literary sources, it is assumed that both he and his brother \ Gyrth supported King Edward\'s exile of \ their brother Tostig, and their brother Harold\'s quest for \ kingship. Barlow (2002, 99) conjectures that \ during 1066 Leofwine may have commanded the Anglo-Saxon fleet, \ though this is purely speculative. Many accounts of the Conquest \ note Leofwine\'s death at Hastings, as does the Tapestry -- for a \ full discussion, see panel 150. Barlow (2002, \ 112) notes that after Hastings no church claimed his body, and if \ unmarried, he was likely left to rot.
\Cf. DeVries (1999, 114-115); Walker (1997, \ 196-197).
\Index: Leofwine, death of, panel 150.
\This text may be opened in a browser for printing or copying by \ pressing Ctrl-P.
'; people["Odo"]={"ref":"Odo","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Odo"}; people["Odo"].html='Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, Earl of Kent \ (Odo)
\Odo was the uterine brother of William, a long-term bishop \ of Bayeux, a holder of extensive lands in both Normandy and \ southern England, and the probable patron of the Tapestry. Brown (1977, \ 126) argues that he must have been born to William\'s lower-class \ mother Herleve and Herluin around \ 1030, and became bishop at a very early age, ca. 1049, when \ he was well under the canonical age of thirty. Bates (1975, \ 2) locates his birth either soon after 1030 or soon after 1035; \ Bernstein (1986, 31) chooses the latter \ and places Odo\'s age, amazingly, at 13 when he receives the \ bishopric of Bayeux.
\In Normandy, Odo was a prominent leader in the ongoing \ ecclesiastical reforms, including the rebuilding of Bayeux \ Cathedral, consecrated in 1077, and the establishment of a \ prominent monastic school (cf. Douglas \ (1964, 119-132)). According to William\'s Ship List (Library: Ship List of William \ the Conqueror (¶2)), Odo contributed 100 ships \ to the invasion fleet, second only to his brother Robert of \ Mortain (cf. Hollister (1987, 222ff., 243)). After \ the Conquest, Odo inherited much of the Godwin and \ Godwinson lands (cf. Bates (1975, 9)), served William in a \ secular capacity as well, becoming the earl of Kent, and often \ acted as judicar and viceroy for the king when William was out of \ the country. Based on Domesday evidence, Hollister (1987, 220-222, 242) ranks \ Odo the largest tenant-in-chief in post-Conquest England, with \ properties in seventeen shires, amounting to £3,200 \ personally, with an additional £3,200 in demesne and \ enfeoffment. In 1082, Odo was arrested and imprisoned by William, \ presumably for having designs on purchasing the Papacy and \ recruiting knights who should be in the king\'s service to the Isle \ of Wight for an expedition to Italy. In 1087, Odo was released, \ with his brother Count Robert of Mortain\'s intervention, by \ William\'s deathbed decree, and returned in a state of exile to \ Normandy, where by early 1088 he began to support \ Robert Curthose\'s claims for succession against William Rufus. By \ the end of the year, Odo had lost all his lands in England. The \ last eight years of his life were spent restoring his see at Bayeux \ and supporting the cause of the first Crusade. Odo died in early \ 1097 in Palermo, while on the First Crusade to the Holy Land. \ Orderic Vitalis summarizes Odo\'s post-Conquest \ authority:
\What shall I say of Odo, bishop of Bayeux, \ who was an earl palatine dreaded by Englishmen everywhere, and able \ to dispense justice like a second king? He had authority greater \ than all earls and other magnates in the kingdom, and gained much \ ancient treasure as well as holding Kent (Chibnall (1968, \ 264-265)).
\Scholars generally agree that Odo is the patron of the \ Tapestry, based on his multiple appearances in the textile and the \ fact that he was a major presence in both Kent and Bayeux, the two \ locales frequently associated with the piece. Additionally, as \ Werckmeister (1976, 582) and many \ others point out, three other personages in the Tapestry, \ Wadard , Vital , and \ Turold , were also probably \ vassals of Odo. Lewis (1999, 116-130) explores in \ detail how the second half of the Tapestry foregrounds Odo\'s rise \ to power in England as wealthy landowner, the inheritor of Harold\'s \ lands, and earl of Kent. For other discussions of Odo\'s presence in \ the Tapestry, and his patronage of the work, see Werckmeister (1976, 579-589), Brown (1977, \ 126-130), Bernstein (1986, 30-36, 136-143), \ Legge (1987, 84-85), Brown (1990, \ 28), Grape (1994, 54), and Gameson \ (1997, 176-181). See also panel 158 and Museum: Odo\'s \ Seal for a discussion of the bishop\'s secular \ side.
\Bates (1975) contains a \ comprehensive discussion of Odo\'s secular and religious activities, \ possessions, and political troubles, and remains the authoritative \ treatment of this figure. See also Bates (2001, 125-127).
\Index: Odo of Bayeux, presides over dinner at \ Hastings, panel 112; with Robert and William, \ panel \ 113; rallies troops at Hastings panel 158; ordering construction of the \ invasion fleet(?), panel 80; riding with William at \ Hastings(?) panel 127; see also Museum: Odo\'s \ Seal.
'; people["Rivallon"]={"ref":"Rivallon","html":"", "gif":"0", "caption":"Rivallon of Cambour"}; people["Rivallon"].html='Rivallon of Cambour, Lord of Dol Rivallon (also spelled \ Rhiwallon)
\Rivallon was a lord from the northeast section of Brittany. Keats-Rohan (1991, 164) discusses \ Rivallon\'s life, and notes that he was brother to Junguené, \ the immensely powerful archbishop of Dol \ (1008-1035). In the early 1060s, he was one of a number of Breton \ nobles who pledged allegiance to William. According to William of \ Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶7)), in 1064 Rivallon was besieged \ at Dol by Count Conan II, a Breton overlord with \ considerable anti-Norman sentiments. In response, William mounted \ an expedition to support Rivallon (see panels 40 - 55) \ and Conan subsequently fled (however, see Keats-Rohan (165-166) for \ reasons not to trust Poitiers\' version).
\According to William of Poitiers\' account, Rivallon, \ though grateful, begged Duke William not to engage Conan in the \ lands around Dol, as such a battle would ravish his territory and \ turn the peasantry against the Normans as well as the Bretons. \ According to Poitiers, the duke replied to Rivallon that any hasty \ withdrawal would be disgraceful, but promised to repay the lord for \ any damage done to the land. Additionally, he forbade his troops to \ do any harm to the lord\'s crops and cattle. William\'s troops obeyed \ this command so well that a single ear of corn would have sufficed \ to repay any damage done, Conan retreated, and no battle occurred. \ Note that the depiction of the events in the Tapestry differs \ slightly from this account in that they possibly suggest that Conan \ and William did clash at Dol. See the commentary for panel 46 and \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign, for more details. \ Douglas (1964, 178ff.) provides a \ succinct synopsis of Rivallon\'s situation and the political climate \ in Brittany at the time.
\Index: Rivallon of Dol, Glossary: William\'s \ Breton Campaign, Glossary: \ Dol; sister betrothed to Harold(?) panel \ 39.
'; people["Robert"]={"ref":"Robert","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Robert of Mortain"}; people["Robert"].html='Robert, Count of Mortain (Rodbert)
\Robert was the uterine brother of William and full brother \ of Odo of \ Bayeux. He was born c. 1030 to Herleve, William\'s \ mother, and Herluin, vicomte of \ Conteville. In 1055, the growing power of Duke William was enough \ for him to remove William Wernlenc as the count of Mortain and \ replace him with Robert, his half-brother. Mortain, in the \ southwest of Normandy, was a particularly important county for \ William; it bordered on Brittany, Maine, and Bellême. \ Bachrach (1986, 14, 16) supposes that \ William may have given Robert some of the administrative duties of \ maintaining the pre-invasion camps at Dives-sur-mer and St. \ Valery.
\Most chronicles of the Conquest note Robert\'s involvement in the \ invasion and battle at Hastings. According to William\'s Ship \ List (Library: \ Ship List of William the Conqueror), Robert \ contributed 120 ships to the invasion fleet, the most of any Norman \ noble (see Hollister (1987, 222ff., 243)). The \ Tapestry explicitly depicts Robert in panel 113 at a \ war council with his brothers Odo and William, while it has been \ suggested that Robert is shown, but not named, in panel 112, \ panel \ 116, and panel 127. Bachrach \ (1987, 18) suggests that Odo included Robert in the Tapestry \ because he considered him part of an important factio in \ post-Conquest political struggles.
\After the conquest, Robert became one of the largest landholders \ in England, and held, among other territories, the rape of Pevensey and most of Cornwall. Robert \ also extensively built up fortifications along the Sussex coast and \ helped revive Pevensey\'s economy (see Golding \ (1991, 130-134)); he may have also given land in Cornwall to the \ abbey at Mont \ St. Michel ((Golding 143), also see panel 43). Based \ on Domesday evidence, Hollister (1987, 220-222, 242) ranks \ Robert the third largest tenant-in-chief in post-Conquest England, \ with personal properties of almost £2,000 (his brother Odo is \ ranked first). William of Malmesbury, however, reports that Robert \ was stupid and dull, though this would belie the enormous \ responsibilities William had entrusted to him in both Normandy and \ England. Perhaps because of these traits, or a headstrong nature, \ or substantial time spent in Normandy, Robert appears to have \ played a comparatively minor role in the political affairs of \ England. As Golding (144) puts it, Robert was always a Norman, and \ never an Anglo-Norman. At William\'s deathbed, the count was the \ only member of William\'s close family present, and was instrumental \ in gaining his brother Odo\'s release from prison. Robert apparently \ assisted Odo in his rebellion against William Rufus, but unlike Odo \ was subsequently pardoned and had his lands restored. Robert \ outlived most of his comrades at Hastings -- he is recorded as \ witnessing a charter as late as May of 1092, and died c. \ 1095.
\ For a full biographical treatment of Robert, see Golding \ (1991, passim). For a review of the history of the lords of \ Mortain, and the process by which Robert gained these lands, see \ Potts (1992). \Index: Robert of Mortain, with Odo and William at \ Hastings, panel 113; at feast in Hastings(?) \ panel \ 112; orders fortifications(?), panel 116; accompanies William at \ Hastings(?), panel 127.
'; people["Stigand"]={"ref":"Stigand","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Stigand"}; people["Stigand"].html='Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury \ (Stigant)
\Stigand\'s ecclesiastical career spanned the reigns of five \ English kings. As Smith (1993, 199-204) recounts, from \ his appointment by Cnut as royal chaplain in 1020 to his final \ deposition by William in 1070 and death two years later, Stigand \ held the confidence of many leading English and Anglo-Norman \ figures, and amassed extensive lands and wealth, especially in East \ Anglia. Stigand was also quite adept at juggling loyalties as \ political tides in England changed. During his tenure, he held sees \ in East Anglia and Winchester, became the archbishop of \ Canterbury, and advised Cnut, Emma-Ælfgifu, the Godwin family, \ King Edward \ the Confessor, and King Harold \ II, before unsuccessfully attempting to stay in King \ William\'s good graces.
\In the early 1050s, Stigand mediated the series of negotiations \ between King Edward and Earl Godwin which led to the latter\'s \ exile in 1051 and return the next year. In 1052, Stigand \ uncanonically replaced Robert of Jumièges as archbishop of \ Canterbury after the latter was exiled \ by Edward. Stigand was only granted his own pallium in 1058 by the \ anti-pope Benoît X. For this and other alleged activities, \ Stigand was successively excommunicated by no less than five popes, \ and finally deposed by William and the Winchester Synod in 1070, \ where he was replaced by Lanfranc. Eadmer of Canterbury (Library: Eadmer \ (¦9)) reports that for his coronation, William was \ "unwilling to receive consecration at [Stigand\'s] hands, lest he \ should seem to be taking upon himself a curse instead of a \ blessing."
\Stenton (1957, 12) comments that Pope \ Alexander II\'s support of the Norman expedition in 1066 was \ primarily in hopes of deposing Stigand. Stigand appears once in the \ Tapestry, at the scene of Harold\'s coronation (see panel 72) and \ perhaps also twice earlier at the scene of Edward\'s death (see \ panel \ 70). Cowdrey (1997, 102, n. 31) argues for \ all three representations, and posits that they in sum show \ Stigand\'s duplicitous nature. In the anonymous Vita \ Æedwardi (Library: Vita (¶2)), Stigand is \ present at Edward\'s deathbed, and whispers "with folly in his \ heart" to Earl Harold that the dying king has lost his mind.
\For a discussion of the specific nature of Stigand\'s role at \ Harold\'s coronation, and its political \ implications, see the commentary for panel 72. For a full discussion of \ Stigand and his place in Anglo-Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon, and \ Anglo-Norman England, see Smith (1993, 199-219). For a more \ sympathetic defense of Stigand\'s accession to Canterbury, see \ Walker (1997, 49-50).
\Index: Stigand of Canterbury: at Edward\'s deathbed(?), \ panel 70; \ at Harold\'s coronation, panel 72.
'; people["Turold"]={"ref":"Turold","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Turold"}; people["Turold"].html='Turold (Turoldus)
\Turold is one of the most discussed figures of the \ Tapestry. Critics disagree on even which figure in panel 23 is \ Turold -- the inscription could apply equally to either the second \ messenger or the dwarfish attendant. Bertrand (1966, 83) associates \ the name with the dwarf and briefly reviews possible identities for \ him. Bertrand also, however, conjectures that an "error of \ perspective" resulted in the miniaturized depiction here. Wilson \ (1985, 176) is "attracted" by the idea that Turold is the dwarf and \ suggests that the artist here represents himself in a diminutive \ form, as was common in manuscript traditions. Grape (1994, \ 39) agrees that the inscription must refer to the dwarf, in keeping \ with the Tapestry\'s method of placing inscriptions over the heads \ of figures, but rejects Wilson\'s notion of the figure as diminutive \ artist. Furthermore, Grape notes that Thorald was a \ Scandinavian name common and popular in Normandy, which implies \ that the dwarf was from Normandy, not Beaurain. In accord with such \ popularity, Musset (1989, 251) records twenty-nine \ Turolds living in Normandy before 1066.
\Parisse (1983, 112) and Cowdrey \ (1997, 94, n. 2) disagree that the figure is a dwarf, and instead \ assert that the size has to do rather with issues of perspective. \ Lejeune (1966, 15) suggests that the \ dwarf was well known as Turold\'s jongleur and traveling companion \ and that Turold was the second messenger. Tavernier (1914, 175) examines the \ pre-Restoration drawings of Stothard (see Facsimile: \ Stothard , panel 27) and argues that originally the \ lines of the Turold inscription did not touch the horses\' reins on \ the right, making the attachment of the label clearly to the \ messenger on the left. Likewise, Fowke (1898, \ 41) notes that the messengers came unattended and that therefore \ the dwarf must belong to Guy\'s company and would most likely not be \ known by the artist. Additionally, he sees a conscious effort on \ behalf of the designer to attach the inscription to the body of the \ messenger.
\Fowke (42) is one of the first scholars to review several \ possible identities of Turold and records that the archivist of St. \ Lô showed him a charter bearing the name of Turold, Constable \ of Bayeux, and Duke William. Werckmeister (1976, 580 n. 242) \ supports this attribution and reports that a Turold appears as a \ follower of William from 1043-1060 at Rouen. \ Bridgeford (1999, 175-176) argues that \ as the castle at Beaurain may have actually lain in the neighboring \ county of St. Pol, a close ally of Boulogne, Turold may not have \ been a Norman, but rather a figure with a close association with \ Count \ Eustace II. Bridgeford (1999, 176, n. 54) \ further identifies a Walterius Turoldus as a debtor of Count Guy in \ records of eleventh-century Ponthieu accounts.
\Amyot (1821, 204), Freeman \ (1875, 571), Stenton (1957, 24, n. 2), and \ Bernstein (1986, 33) \ all support another identity -- that of Turold of Rochester, the \ father of Ralf filius Turoldi who, according to Domesday \ Book, held a considerable estate in England as a tenant of Bishop \ Odo. Brooks (1978, 8, n. 22) adds that this \ Turold of Rochester "was one of Odo\'s most powerful tenants and was \ heavily involved in the trial at Penendon Heath" and that only this \ Turold may be connected to Wadard and Vital, \ the two other minor characters mentioned in the Tapestry. On Turold \ of Rochester, see also Bates (1975, 11). Bachrach \ (1987, 12-14) agrees that Turold is a tenant of Odo\'s, but \ identifies the represented Turold as the dwarf -- a subversive \ ridiculing of an honored Norman miles by an Anglo-Saxon \ artist, possibly as a result of Turold\'s involvement at Penendon \ Heath. Lejeune (1969, 15-21) suggests that \ Turold is Turold, Abbot of Peterborough, a relative of Bishop Odo \ known for his military exploits. She also suggests, without \ substantiation, that this same Turold was the author of the \ Chanson de Roland, and possibly even the designer of the \ Tapestry.
\Though much has been written about Turold\'s possible English \ connections, the Turold of the Tapestry may have had strong \ Continental connections. Tavernier (1914, 177-183) conducts a \ thorough review of documentary evidence and like others concludes \ that this Turold is most likely a "hostiarius Turoldus" who, from \ about 1050 onwards, is to be met at the court of William, and after \ the Conquest had his seat at Rochester and held large possessions \ in England." However, Taverner improbably argues that the Tapestry \ artist is also named Turold and is the son of Turold the messenger \ and the same Turold as who composed the Chanson de Roland \ (see also his commentary on the borders, below). Additionally, \ Prentout (1935, 22) discusses a Turold \ whose oblation charter appears in Préaux along with \ documents that have Vital and Wadard as witnesses. Werckmeister (1976, 587-588) and \ Brown (1990, 26-27) consider the \ appearance of Turold, along with Wadard (see panel 107) and \ Vital (see panel 128) in the Tapestry as evidence \ that the three were vassals of Odo\'s who sponsored the production \ of the Tapestry as a pièce justificative for Odo to \ William while the former was imprisoned in Rouen in the 1080s.
\A few scholars read double identities in the depiction. While \ Brown (1977, 47) argues that Turold was \ most likely Turold of Rochester, she also hints that this figure \ could be a "convenient conflation of two personalities." Bennet \ (1980, 9) raises the possibility that the dwarf here has no \ significance and is merely decorative, like the diminutive boys in \ panel 68 \ beneath Edward\'s bier. However, he also (10-13) considers the \ possibility that the designer of the Tapestry deliberately framed \ the dwarf by the sword, reins, elbow, and horse\'s head, and \ provided the dwarf with his own "false border" which names him. \ This creates two instances of the dwarf, one in the main scene, and \ one as seen through this window frame, which suggests a second, \ significant meaning. In his conclusion, Bennet discounts the idea \ that this figure is the designer himself, but finds this \ simultaneous representation intriguing.
\For a discussion of specific details of the representation of \ Turold in the Tapestry, see "Details" in the commentary for \ panel 23. \ For reviews of historical Turolds, see Fowke (1898, \ 41-42), Tavernier (1914, 177-183), and Prentout \ (1935, 18-19).
\Index: Turold, panel 23; other possible \ representations of, panel 26, panel 27, \ panel \ 33.
'; people["Vital"]={"ref":"Vital","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Vital"}; people["Vital"].html='Vital (Vital)
\In panel 128, a Norman scout named Vital \ reports to William.
\Loomis (1923, 5) comments that Vital \ must have been an important figure to rate an entire sentence in \ the Tapestry, and subsequent scholars have found evidence which \ points towards a probable candidate. Prentout \ (1935, 21-22) discovered a Vital in Normandy who, with Wadard (see panel 107), \ witnesses three charters of the abbey of St. Peter\'s at \ Préaux. Additionally, Prentout reports that Vital is \ mentioned in a document of Bayeux Cathedral as a tenant of the \ cathedral under William the Conqueror. Stenton \ (1957, 21), following Amyot (1821, 204) and \ Corney (1836, 14), notes that Vital, \ like Wadard, appears as a tenant of Bishop Odo of \ Bayeux in England after the Conquest. Brooks \ (1978, 8) writes that this Vital had extensive holdings in Kent and \ Caen under Odo, and held lands from St. Augustine\'s and the \ archbishop in Canterbury. He was also one of the \ knights of the archbishop, and probably the same Vitalis de \ Cantebire who in a court record was charged with plundering an \ urban guild of its lands around Canterbury. Werckmeister (1976, 587-588) and \ Brown (1990, 26-27) consider the \ appearance of Vital, along with Wadard (see panel 107) and \ Turold (see panel 23) in the \ Tapestry as evidence that the three were vassals of Odo\'s who \ sponsored the production of the Tapestry as a pièce \ justificative for Odo to William while the former was \ imprisoned in Rouen in the 1080s. Vital held substantial lands \ sixteen miles from Dover. Bridgeford (1999, 173-174) argues that \ he may have been instrumental in defending Odo\'s castle in Dover \ against Eustace of Boulogne in 1067, and for \ this reason is included in the Tapestry.
\Bachrach (1987, 14-16) suggests, with \ little substantiation, that Anglo-Saxon artists suppressed design \ elements that supposedly represented Vital not as a scout, but as \ an important emissary from William to Harold. Werckmeister (539) \ also suggests a comparison between this scene and scene XXXVI from \ the Roman triumphal column of Trajan, where the emperor speaks to \ his scouts.
\Index: Vital, panel 128; possible second \ representation of, panel 130.
'; people["Wadard"]={"ref":"Wadard","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Wadard"}; people["Wadard"].html='Wadard (Wadard)
\In panel 107, a figure named Wadard \ presides over the supplies and provisions of the Norman \ troops.
\Most scholars, following Gurney \ (1817, 368), Amyot (1821, 202-204), and Corney \ (1836, 14), identify Wadard with the Wadard recorded in Domesday \ Book as one of the leading tenants of Bishop \ Odo. Stenton (1957, 21) notes that Wadard is \ a rare enough name that such an association is warranted, and \ Brooks (1978, 8, n. 22) points out that \ in addition to holding extensive lands in Kent, Dover, and Surrey, \ Wadard also received property from St. Augustine\'s in Canterbury. \ Brooks also reports that references to a Wadard and Vital \ (cf. panel 128) are found in pre-Conquest \ Normandy, a subject most thoroughly treated by Prentout \ (1935, 19ff.). Like Corney, Verrier (1946, 23), and Maclagan \ (1949, 12), Prentout considers Wadard to be a provisions officer, \ and draws a connection between his job and his name, which could \ mean "warder." Fowke (1898, 103) cites a similar, \ earlier argument by the Abbé de la Rue that Wadard is \ another form of Waard, Weard, or Ward, names \ which imply the occupation of warder. Prentout also (21-22) traces \ references to Wadard and Vital to three charters of the abbey of \ St. Peter\'s at Préaux in Normandy, where they signed as \ witnesses. Werckmeister (1976, 587-588) and \ Brown (1990, 26-27) consider the \ appearance of Wadard, along with Turold (cf. panel 23) and \ Vital (cf. panel 128), in \ the Tapestry as evidence that the three were vassals of Odo\'s who \ sponsored the production of the Tapestry as a pièce \ justificative for Odo to William while the former was \ imprisoned in Rouen in the 1080s. Based on evidence \ from the Domesday entry for Dover \ and thirteenth-century castleguard surveys, Bridgeford (1999, 170-173) argues that \ Wadard may have been instrumental in defending Odo\'s castle in \ Dover against Eustace in 1067, and thus is included \ in the Tapestry. Bachrach (1987, 14-16) \ suggests, with little substantiation, that Anglo-Saxon artists \ suppressed design elements that supposedly highlighted Wadard\'s \ "command role."
\For a discussion of specific details of the representation of \ Wadard in the Tapestry, see the "Details" section of the commentary \ for panel 107.
\Index: Wadard, panel 107.
'; people["William"]={"ref":"William","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"William I"}; people["William"].html='William I, William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy and \ King of England (Willelmi, Wilgelm)
\William was born c. 1028 and died Sept. 9, 1087. \ The illegitimate son of the Norman duke Robert I, he \ inherited Normandy in 1035, consolidating his \ rule in spite of ardent baronial opposition around 1042. He \ successfully faced further rebellions and after 1050 began to take \ an interest in acquiring land, first in Maine and Brittany, and then in England. He may \ have been promised the English throne by the English king Edward the \ Confessor (cf. Glossary: Claims to the \ English Throne). After Edward’s death, William \ invaded England and defeated King \ Harold at Hastings on October 14, 1066. On Christmas \ Day, 1066, William was crowned king of England, founding the \ Anglo-Norman monarchy and realm.
\For a thorough treatment of William\'s life and accomplishments, \ see Douglas (1964). Bates (2001) \ consolidates much from Douglas and subsequent scholarship, but does \ not provide specific citations.
\Index: William the Conqueror, hears of Harold\'s capture \ by Guy, panel 27; meets with Guy, panel 32; returns \ with Harold, panel 34; meets with Harold, panel 37; invades \ Brittany, panel 42, Glossary: William\'s \ Breton Campaign; accepts keys from Conan, panel 54; bestows \ arms on Harold, panel 55; rides to Bayeux, panel 56; \ Harold\'s oath to, panels 58-59; orders the construction \ of the invasion fleet, panel 80; approaches his fleet(?), \ panel 92; \ flagship of, panel 98; feasting at Hastings(?) \ panel \ 112; with brothers Robert and Odo, panel 113; orders fortifications built \ at Hastings(?), panel 116; receives news of Harold at \ Hastings, panel 117; prepares for battle(?) \ panel \ 120; receives scouting report from Vital, panel 127; makes \ speech to troops, panel 134; bares face to rally Normans, \ panel \ 160.
'; var places = new Array (); places["Bayeux"]={"ref":"Bayeux","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Bayeux"}; places["Bayeux"].html='Bayeux (Bagias)
\Bayeux was in the eleventh century one of the major \ centers in Normandy. Its bishop, Odo, was the half-brother of \ William and the probable patron of the Tapestry. Today, Bayeux \ still houses the Tapestry, and has records of its possession back \ to 1476 (cf. Introduction: Location and Purpose and \ Introduction: \ Dating ).
\As a capital of Gaul, Bayeux was first known as \ Bajocasses, and then known as Augustodurum and \ Civitas Baiocasium under the Romans. Hrólfr \ (Rollo) captured the city in 880, thirty years before he officially \ conquered the Norman territory.
\Into the eleventh century, Bayeux held on to its Scandinavian \ heritage, longer than other parts of the region. In panel 59, the \ Tapestry depicts Harold swearing his oath to William at Bayeux, \ though this location is contested (see commentary in panel 59). See \ the inscription commentary in panel 57 for lexical and phonological \ studies of the term Bagias.
\Index: Bayeux, inscription of, panel 57; \ representation of, panel 58; Harold swears oath at, \ panel 59; \ Tapestry\'s display in, Introduction: Location and Purpose, Museum: Tapestry Hanging \ in Bayeux Cathedral; Odo\'s rebuilding of, Glossary: \ Odo.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Beaurain"]={"ref":"Beaurain","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Beaurain"}; places["Beaurain"].html='Beaurain (Belrem)
\In the eleventh century, Beaurain was the chief town in \ the province of Ponthieu, a few miles inland on the \ river Canche and some ten miles from Montreuil. When Harold was \ captured by Guy \ of Ponthieu, he was imprisoned in Beaurain until his \ release by William (see panels 13ff.).
\For further discussion of the representation of Beaurain \ in the Tapestry, see the commentary for panel 20 and \ panel 28. \ See Taylor (1992, passim) for a \ discussion of possible sites of the Beaurain fortifications. \ Bridgeford (1999, 175-176) notes while \ the town of Beaurain may have been situated in Ponthieu, the castle \ may have lain in the neighboring county of St. Pol, a close ally of \ Eustace of \ Boulogne.
\Index: Beaurain, inscription of, panel 16; Guy and \ Harold at, panel 20; other representations of(?), \ panel 25, \ panel \ 28.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Bosham"]={"ref":"Bosham","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Bosham"}; places["Bosham"].html='Bosham (Bosham)
\An estate in the southeast of England on Bosham Channel \ which controlled access to Chichester harbor, three and a half \ miles away, Bosham was perhaps the most important and richest \ estate in Sussex. McNulty (1989, 68) records that it was \ "the equivalent of some 13,000 acres, a hundred times the endowment \ of most churches." Bosham was originally held by Earl Godwin, \ Harold\'s father, and then by Harold himself. After the conquest, \ this estate was controlled by William and Bishop Osbern of Exeter. \ Pollock (1997) advances the \ tenuous argument that the bones of King Harold may have been \ interred at Bosham church. Barlow (2002, 113) notes but refutes \ such claims.
\As Brown (1985, 17) and Wilson \ (1985, 174) observe, no extant source contemporary with the \ Tapestry mentions that Harold departed from Bosham on his mission \ to Normandy (see panels 4 - 7), though Freeman \ (1875, 689-90) comments that many later chronicles, including \ William of Malmesbury (Library: Malmesbury (¦2)) and \ Wace (Library: \ Wace (¦4)), do cite Bosham. The entry for \ 1051 in version E of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (see Whitelock (1986, 121)) states that \ Bosham was the point of departure for several of the Godwins exiled \ by King Edward, and Fowke (1898, 27) comments on a legend \ (from Walter Map) that Earl Godwin stole the manor from the \ Archbishop of Canterbury by asking him Da mihi Basium \ (“give me the kiss of peace”) and then reinterpreting \ Basium as “Bosham.” Barlow \ (2002, 23) reports a slightly different version of this legend. \ McNulty (1989, 68) reports that another \ Godwin, Harold\'s brother Swein, lured his cousin, earl Beorn, to \ Bosham in order to murder him. On the basis of such episodes, \ Brown (1977, 44), Brown (1985, \ 17), and McNulty have all argued that the inclusion of Bosham in \ the Tapestry implies a further degree of evil and treachery in the \ character and lineage of Harold.
\For basic background on Bosham, see also Macdermott \ (1912).
\Index: Bosham, Harold\'s journey to, panel 2; \ inscription of, panel 4; church at, panel 4, Museum: \ Bosham; feast and manor of, panels 5 - 6, \ Museum: \ Moissac; Harold\'s landfall at(?) panel 62.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Brittany"]={"ref":"Brittany","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Brittany"}; places["Brittany"].html='Brittany \Brittany is a region and former province of northwestern \ France corresponding with the departments of Finistere, \ Cotes-du-Nord, Morbihan, Ille-et-Vilaine, and Loire-Atlantique. A \ peninsula projecting into the Atlantic Ocean, the region is \ bordered on the north by the English Channel and on the south by \ the Bay of Biscay. In the tenth century, Brittany became a duchy \ with its capital at Rennes. During the eleventh century, it \ was plagued with rebellion as sections of the region leaned towards \ an affiliation with Normandy. In panels 44 - 55 of the Tapestry, \ William, joined by Harold, invades Brittany to subdue Count Conan \ II, an antagonistic duke of Brittany. For more \ information on this exploit, see the Glossary: William\'s \ Breton Campaign.
\Index: Brittany, invasion of, panels 44 - 55, \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a \ map of the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
\ This text may be opened in a browser for printing or copying \ by pressing Ctrl-P.'; places["Canterbu"]={"ref":"Canterbu","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Canterbury"}; places["Canterbu"].html='Canterbury
\Like many English cities, Canterbury was originally a \ Roman stronghold, significant because it connected three trading \ ports to London. Canterbury was also the site of Augustine\'s \ Christian mission to England in 597. In the eleventh century, \ Canterbury continued to play a dominant role in England, had two \ major monastic centers, St. Augustine\'s and Christ Church, and was \ an archbishopric. After his victory at Hastings, some sources \ report Canterbury was the second city William took, after Dover \ (see, for example, Library: Poitiers \ (¦50)).
\In the post-Conquest period, Canterbury became a \ stronghold of Norman power; Odo, William\'s half-brother and bishop \ of Bayeux, became Earl of Kent, the Norman \ Lanfranc became archbishop of Canterbury, and St. Augustine\'s Abbey \ had a succession of Norman abbots.
\It is widely held that the Bayeux Tapestry was \ manufactured at one of the monastic houses in Canterbury shortly \ after the Conquest (cf. Introduction: Origin of the \ Tapestry ).
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Couesnon"]={"ref":"Couesnon","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Couesnon River"}; places["Couesnon"].html='Couesnon River (Cosnonis)
\The Couesnon is one of the four rivers in Brittany which feeds into the Gulf of \ Saint-Malo, the body of water in which Mont St. \ Michel is situated. The possession of this river was \ much prized and contested, as it afforded quick and easy navigation \ into the heart of what is now France. In the eleventh century, it \ often marked the boundary between Brittany and Normandy. Keats-Rohan (1991, 162, 163-165) \ locates the river within the history of Bretano-Norman territorial \ disputes. In panels 43 - 45, Norman troops ford this \ river during William\'s Breton campaign and fall prey \ to quicksand.
\Both Bruce (1856, 62) and Fowke (1898, \ 59) discuss the dangerous conditions still prevalent on the coastal \ fords of the river. Fowke describes it as follows:
\The passage of this river, which the \ changing tides fill with a moving sand, is frequently attended with \ great danger. Shifting as it does, a knowledge of the locality is \ not always a safeguard against the treacherous sand, and as to the \ insecurity of the wayfarer, thick fogs oftentimes close rapidly \ around him, so that he is unable to reach a place of security \ before the rising flood sweeps him to his ruin. \ (59)
\Index: Couesnon River, crossing of, panels 43 - 45; \ inscription of, panel 45; dangers of, panel \ 45.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Dinan"]={"ref":"Dinan","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Dinan"}; places["Dinan"].html='Dinan (Dinant)
\Dinan was a town and fortress of Brittany, situated \ on a height on the left bank of the river Rance, which feeds into \ the gulf at St. Malo (as does the Couesnon \ River). In the eleventh century, Dinan was a \ principal stronghold of Brittany.
\In the Tapestry, Count Conan II of Brittany might be \ shown fleeing to Dinan after a route at Dol (see \ panel 47) \ by William\'s troops. In panel 52, Conan surrenders the keys to \ Dinan, presumably ending William\'s Breton campaign. No other source \ contemporary to the Tapestry records this incident or even mentions \ Dinan. For a further discussion of the place of Dinan within the \ narrative of the Tapestry, see the commentary for panel 52 and \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign.
\Index: Dinan, attack on, panels 50 - 54; \ fortress of, panel 52; men of(?) panel \ 52.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of the \ entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Dives"]={"ref":"Dives","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Dives-sur-Mer"}; places["Dives"].html='Dives-sur-Mer
\Dives-sur-Mer is a small fishing village on the coast of \ Normandy, situated fourteen miles from Caen at the mouth of the \ river Dives. William\'s naval fleet assembled in Dives-sur-Mer by \ early August of 1066, where it waited for a month before sailing \ north along the coast to St. Valery (see Glossary: Channel \ Crossing).
\In the eleventh century, Dives was also a boat-building \ center, and it is likely that many of the scenes of shipbuilding \ and provisioning represented in panels 84 - 94 took place in Dives. See \ Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169) and Grape (1994, \ 129).
\Index: Dives, shipbuilding at(?), panels 84 - \ 94.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Dol"]={"ref":"Dol","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Dol"}; places["Dol"].html='Dol (Dol)
\One of the principal cities in Brittany, Dol is situated near the \ coast and at one time, like Mont St. \ Michel, was completely surrounded by water. Dol was \ also an archbishopric, and a highly prized citadel besieged many \ times throughout the middle ages.
\In 1064, Count Conan II of Brittany \ besieged Dol, whose lord Rivallon of \ Cambour was loyal to Norman rule. Panels 46 - 48 of \ the Tapestry depict the Normans attacking Dol, apparently held by \ Conan, though other reports of these events may differ from those \ shown in the Tapestry (see Glossary:William\'s \ Breton Campaign). For further details of the \ depiction and place of Dol in the Tapestry\'s narrative, see the \ commentary for panels 46 - 47.
\Index: Dol, attack on, panel 46; \ fortress of, panel 47; siege of, \ panel 47, \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a \ map of the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Dover"]={"ref":"Dover","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Dover"}; places["Dover"].html='Soon after the Germanic migration to England in the fifth \ century began, Dover, originally known as Dofras, was an \ early and major settlement in the new kingdom of Kent. By the \ eleventh century, the town was a prosperous port with its own mint \ and substantial trade to the continent. Like Hastings, Dover became one of the \ Cinque ports, an association of English maritime cities most active \ from the eleventh to the fifteenth century.
\In 1051, Dover was the site of political foment, when men \ belonging to Eustace of Boulogne, who was \ returning from a visit with King Edward, quarreled with some \ English citizens, and lives were lost on both sides. Earl Godwin , \ Harold\'s father, was ordered by Edward to punish the citizens of \ Dover, but refused, initiating a process of events that eventually \ led to the temporary exile of the Godwin family.
\Though Dover is not explicitly depicted in the Tapestry, \ scholars have considered Dover as the likely point of Harold\'s \ return from Normandy in panel 62. Holmes \ (1959, 182) places this landfall at Dover, but gives no evidence or \ reasons for this location. Lewis (1999, 44) elaborates on this \ identification, noting that in William of Poitiers\' account Harold \ had sworn to William that upon Edward\'s death he would place a \ garrison of the duke\'s men in Dover Castle at his own expense \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¦4)).
\After William\'s victory at Hastings, Dover, which gave access to \ the shortest crossing to the Continent, became a key objective; \ William captured the port within two weeks of Hastings. The now \ missing end of the Tapestry could have represented the taking of \ this vital city.
\In 1067, Eustace of Boulogne returned to Dover, but this time as \ the leader of an aborted invasion attempt.
\Index: Dover, Harold lands at(?), panel 62.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Eu"]={"ref":"Eu","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Eu"}; places["Eu"].html='Eu, a near-coastal Norman fortification on the River Bresle \ since the Roman period, became an important frontier stronghold \ under the Normans. Eu was a military hotspot during the campaigns \ of Rollo, the early tenth-century Viking founder of Normandy, and \ by William\'s time it continued to serve as a defensive position on \ the border between Normandy and Ponthieu. Bates (2001, 45) notes \ that William and Mathilda were married at Eu. The heroic service of \ Robert, count of Eu, at Hastings is noted in several Norman \ chronicles; Robert is also recorded as an important contributor in \ the "Ship List of William the Conqueror" (Library: Ship \ List (¦1)).
\It is generally thought that the handover of Harold by Guy of \ Ponthieu to Duke William, as represented in \ panel 32, \ took place near Eu. This meeting, recorded by William of Poitiers \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¦3)), is commented upon by Douglas \ (1964, 176) and Taylor (1992, 10).
\Index: Eu, handing over of Harold at (?) panel 32.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Hastings"]={"ref":"Hastings","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Hastings"}; places["Hastings"].html='Hastings (Hestinga, Hestenga) and \ Battle:
\Hastings was a major port city of the Cinque ports, an \ association of English maritime cities most active from the \ eleventh to the fifteenth century. The port was also the closest \ city to William\'s landing site, and was quickly overtaken by Norman \ forces. Northwest of Hastings is the site of the 1066 battle, near \ a village now aptly named "Battle," where the Normans defeated the \ English, leading to the Norman Conquest of England. Wright \ (1996, 53) considers it likely that William chose Hastings as his \ bridgehead on the advice of Normans in the area, as
\Hastings provided a geographically defensible \ position protected to some extent by the now dried up lower reaches \ of the rivers Brede and Bulverhythe on the flanks, and a beach from \ which a defended retreat could be made should the need \ arise.
\Bachrach (1986, 21-23) surveys the \ state of the Anglo-Saxon and then Norman garrisons at both Pevensey and Hastings, and provides a \ detailed assessment of William\'s occupation and expansion of the \ Roman fortifications at Hastings (see also panel 116).
\Index: Hastings, plundering of(?), panel 106, \ panel \ 118; feast at, panel 112; construction of \ fortifications of, panel 116; representation of(?) \ panel \ 119; inscriptions of, panel 104, panel 116, \ panel \ 121.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Mont"]={"ref":"Mont","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Mont Saint Michel"}; places["Mont"].html='Mont Saint Michel (Monte Michaelis):
\Mont St. Michel is a 3-acre rocky islet topped by a famous \ Gothic abbey, 1.6 km (1 mi) off the northwest coast of France in \ the Bay of Mont St. Michel in the English Channel. The island, \ located 5 km (3 mi) from the shore during the middle ages, is now \ surrounded by water only two times a month. On top of it stands the \ towering Benedictine abbey of Mont St. Michel, an architectural \ masterpiece built in the thirteenth century, replacing the original \ abbey (shown in the upper border of panel 43), which was built in 966 by \ Duke Richard \ II of Normandy, but destroyed by King Philip II of France \ in 1203.
\The inclusion of Mont St. Michel in the tapestry is a bit \ incongruous; as far as other accounts relate, the abbey has nothing \ to do with William\'s Breton Campaign, other than \ perhaps as a geographic marker. See Lewis (1999, \ 89-90), however, for an argument that this site of pilgrimage may \ be viewed as a "sacred talismanic link" between Normandy and \ England, and Harold and William. For full references of discussions \ of the monastery\'s inclusion and representation, see the commentary \ for panels 43 - 44.
\Index: Mont St. Michel, panel 43, William\'s relation to, \ panel 42; \ Odo\'s relation to, panel 43; representation of Abbot \ Ranulphe or Richard II in relation to(?), panel 45; \ writings at, panel 20.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Normandy"]={"ref":"Normandy","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Normandy"}; places["Normandy"].html='Normandy
\The region of Normandy is located in northern France along \ the English Channel between Picardy on the east and Brittany on the west. Normandy was part \ of ancient Gaul. Conquered by Julius Caesar in the first century \ B.C., the area was incorporated into the Roman province of \ Lugdunensis in 27 B.C. Franks overran the area during the \ fifth century. Beginning in the ninth century, Norsemen repeatedly \ raided the coast and began to settle there. In 911, the Normans \ were ceded the area by the French king Charles III. Their leader, \ Hrólfr (Rollo), was recognized as the first duke of \ Normandy. On William the Conqueror\'s death in 1087, succession \ disputes among his sons divided Normandy and England, The English \ king Henry I obtained Normandy in 1106, and King John lost Normandy \ to France in 1204. For a good introduction to Normandy and Norman \ culture, see Brown (1984).
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Pevensey"]={"ref":"Pevensey","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Pevensey"}; places["Pevensey"].html='Pevensey (Pevensae)
\Pevensey is a small coastal harbor and borough of Sussex, \ bounded to the east by Hastings and to the west by the region of \ Lewes. After the Conquest, the region surrounding Pevensey was \ designated one of the five rapes of Sussex and granted to Robert of \ Mortain, the brother of Odo and \ half-brother of William. At the time of the Conquest, Pevensey had \ approximately 52 burgesses, though this had doubled by the time of \ the Domesday survey (see Darby (1962, 469)). Golding \ (1991, 130-134) notes that though Pevensey suffered from the \ invasion, Robert subsequently built up fortifications along the \ Sussex coast and helped revive Pevensey\'s economy.
\The inscription in panel 98 specifically names Pevensey as \ the destination for William\'s fleet, and William of Poitiers \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¶25)) states that the fleet landed \ near Pevensey unchallenged. Poitiers and William of Jumièges \ (Library: \ Jumièges (¶6)) also report that William \ then raised fortifications at Pevensey. Panels 102 - 104 \ show the disembarkation of troops and horses, presumably at \ Pevensey, and Grape (1994, 135) and Gibbs-Smith (1957, 171) both comment \ that the gently sloping sand of Pevensey Bay would have made for an \ easy landfall and unloading of horses. Rudkin \ (1928, 60-63) provides a detailed assessment of the possible \ landing areas around both Pevensey and Pevensey Bay, and examines \ several local traditions pertaining to the Norman landfall. Rudkin \ concludes that relatively few of William\'s fleet actually landed at \ Pevensey and that the bulk of ships made landfall across a group of \ sites around Pevensey Bay. Bachrach (1986, 21-23) surveys the \ state of the Anglo-Saxon and then Norman garrisons at both Pevensey \ and Hastings.
\Index: Pevensey, time of arrival, panel 92, \ Glossary: \ Channel Crossing; landing at, panels 102 - \ 104; fortifications at, panel 116; inscription of, panel 98; Robert \ of Mortain\'s holdings in, Glossary: Robert of \ Mortain.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a \ map of the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Ponthieu"]={"ref":"Ponthieu","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Ponthieu"}; places["Ponthieu"].html='Ponthieu
\Ponthieu was a small province just north of Normandy. From \ the early 1050s to 1100, it was ruled by Guy de \ Ponthieu, a count who had in the early 1060s become \ a vassal of William. Though Ponthieu was at this time sympathetic \ to William, it had a recent history of enmity towards the Normans. \ It is commonly believed that Harold landed in Ponthieu in 1064 \ (where he was captured by Guy), during his mission to \ Normandy, and that William launched his invasion \ fleet from near this locale in 1066 (see Glossary: Channel \ Crossing and Glossary: St. Valery).
\Index: Ponthieu, Harold\'s landing at, panels 10 - \ 13.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Rennes"]={"ref":"Rennes","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Rennes"}; places["Rennes"].html='Rennes (Rednes)
\During most of the Middle Ages, Rennes was the chief city \ and capital of Brittany. The principal town of the \ Celtic Redones tribe, Rennes was subsequently taken by the \ Romans and by the tenth century had emerged as the capital of \ Brittany.
\In panel 49 of the Tapestry, Norman troops \ are shown attacking or passing by Rennes during William\'s Breton \ Campaign. No other Norman source includes the city, \ and as Rennes is far from the other two cities William besieges, \ Dol (in panel 47) and Dinan \ (in panel \ 52), an attack on it is considered unlikely, though opinions \ differ. For more details of Rennes and its place in the Tapestry\'s \ narrative, see the commentary for panel 49.
\Index: Rennes, Norman approach to, panel 48; \ fortification and attack(?) of, panel 49; second battle at(?), panel \ 52.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Rouen"]={"ref":"Rouen","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Rouen"}; places["Rouen"].html='Rouen
\The capital of medieval Normandy, Rouen lies on the Seine River \ about 70 miles (110 km) from Paris. The area of Rouen was first \ settled in the fifth century by Celts, and then Romans, who named \ the city Rotumagus. In the eighth century, Charlemagne \ considered Rouen one of the five principal entrances into northern \ Gaul. In 911, in response to pressure from Scandinavian invaders, \ Charles the Simple gave to Hrólfr (Rollo) and his \ Vikings the area around Rouen. From there in the course of the \ tenth century the Norman rulers extended their power over all of \ present-day Normandy. By the time of Duke William\'s rule in the \ late eleventh century, Rouen was the undisputed capital of the area \ and the home of William\'s principal palace.
\Though not mentioned by name in the Tapestry, it is \ probable that the palace that Harold is brought to in panels 37 - 38 is \ in Rouen and possible that the stone structure in panel 28 also \ represents the city. See the commentary for these panels for \ relevant discussions.
\Index: Rouen, William at, panel 27; \ fortification of(?), panel 28; Harold and William at(?), \ panels \ 36-39; cartulary evidence of Turold at(?), panel 23; \ Harold\'s oath at(?), panel 59; William orders fleet \ construction from(?), panel 80.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["St"]={"ref":"St","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"St. Valery"}; places["St"].html='St. Valery sur Somme
\A town on the mouth of the Somme \ River. In the eleventh century, this region was a \ part of Ponthieu. Harold is believed to have \ landed near here in 1064 (see panel 13), and William is believed to \ have launched is invasion fleet from near here in 1066 (cf. \ Glossary: \ Channel Crossing).
\Index: St. Valery sur Somme, William\'s invasion \ fleet launched from (?), panel 92.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Somme"]={"ref":"Somme","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Somme River"}; places["Somme"].html='Somme River
\The Somme River, a 150-mile-long (240 km) stream in \ northern France, rises northeast of Saint Quentin, flows west to \ Amiens, and then northwest to the English Channel. The river is now \ paralleled by canals for 45 miles (72 km). It is believed that \ Harold landed at the mouth of the Somme in 1064, during his \ mission to \ Normandy (see panel 13). Though the Somme estuary was \ nowhere near William\'s residence, the path from the English coast \ near Kent to the Somme was considered to be one of the shortest and \ safest points of passage on the English Channel (see Grainge \ (1996, 130ff.)). Perhaps for the same reasons, William launched his \ invasion fleet from the mouth in 1066, probably from near the town \ of St. Valery \ sur Somme (cf. Glossary: Channel \ Crossing).
\Index: Somme River, Harold seized by Guy on(?), \ panel \ 13.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Westmins"]={"ref":"Westmins","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Westminster"}; places["Westmins"].html='Westminster
\Westminster Abbey, to the southwest of medieval London, \ was the principal residence of the kings of England from shortly \ before the Conquest until the early sixteenth century. By the end \ of the fourteenth century the court had its administrative, \ judicial, and parliamentary headquarters at Westminster. The abbey \ at Westminster is built upon what was once an island -- Thorney \ Island -- a marshy retreat from the City of London. Churches \ existed there possibly as early as the seventh century, and in the \ 1050s, King \ Edward decided to turn the site into an \ ecclesiastic-royal complex that was part monastery, part \ palace.
\For a thorough treatment of Edward\'s rebuilding of \ Westminster Abbey, and its relation to the Tapestry, see Gem (1981, \ 33-66). The structures in panels 66 - 67, panel 70 and, \ most likely, in panel 1 and panel 65 are \ representations of the original Westminster Abbey. Edward the \ Confessor commissioned this structure -- the first of the great \ Anglo-Norman churches built in England -- c. 1050, and died \ shortly after its consecration in January 1066. Gem (33) notes the \ strong link between Westminster and the crown, and suggests that \ Edward\'s rebuilding was designed to embody this link. For more \ information on and a reconstruction of this eleventh century site, \ see, respectively, the commentary for panel 67 and \ panel 70 \ and Museum: \ Westminster Abbey. The Vita Ædwardi (in \ Barlow (1981, 68-71)) contains a \ detailed description of the eleventh-century abbey.
\Index: Westminster, representation of palace at, \ panel 1, \ panels 64 \ - 65, panel 70, panel 72, \ panel 75; \ representation of Abbey, panels 66 - 67, Museum: Westminster \ Abbey, Museum: Abbey of \ Jumièges.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of the \ entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; places["Winchest"]={"ref":"Winchest","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Winchester"}; places["Winchest"].html='Winchester, a town of Roman origin that from the time of King \ Alfred in the late ninth century was considered the central seat of \ England. From the eleventh-century onward, Winchester shared this \ distinction with Westminster , which from \ the time of King Edward gradually grew in dominance. At the time of \ the conquest, Queen Edith, Edward\'s wife, held \ Winchester, and she is reported to have surrendered it to William \ without a fight (see Library: Carmen de Hastingae Proelio \ (¦34)). After his victory in England, William took care to \ be crowned in both Westminster and Winchester, and later \ commissioned monks local to Winchester to prepare Domesday \ Book.
\Wilson (1985, 174) believes that the \ scene between Harold and Edward at the opening of the Tapestry \ takes place at Winchester (see panel 1). Most scholars, however, place \ it at Westminster. Some commentators find the artistic design of \ the Tapestry reminiscent of the "Winchester School" of illumination \ -- see panel 106 and panel 39 for \ examples.
\Click on the thumbnail map shown top right to display a map of \ the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
'; var events = new Array (); events["Battle"]={"ref":"Battle","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Battle of Hastings"}; events["Battle"].html='The Battle of Hastings
\Note: Click on the thumbnail map to the right to open a \ full-screen map of the battlefield.
\The actual battle at Hastings, on October 14, 1066, takes \ up almost one-third of the Tapestry\'s narrative. Freeman \ (1991, 131) counts 26 horses and 44 men shown in the Tapestry for \ William\'s earlier Breton campaign, as compared to 75 and \ 213 of the same for the Battle of Hastings, and remarks on the \ difference of the portrayal of these two military actions, \ believing the latter to be of higher quality.
\In panels 122 - 127, the Normans set out \ from camp; in panels 128 - 133, scouts report to \ William and Harold; and in panels 133 - 144, William gives a \ speech and the Normans advance to battle, increasing the gait of \ their horses from walk to full charge throughout. The battle is \ joined in panel 144, and panels 148 - 154 \ portray a second charge or clash, and the deaths of Harold\'s \ brothers Leofwine and Gyrth. Panels 155 - 158 show an attack on an \ isolated hillock; this is either a third charge, or perhaps a \ depiction of the malfosse scene, where a group of \ Anglo-Saxons cut off from the main army made a brief stand. \ Panels \ 158 - 161 portray (possibly) a Norman flight, and William and Odo\'s \ efforts to rally their troops. Panels 162 - 171 relate a final assault \ on the English, where the lines of defense are shattered and Harold \ himself is killed (see panel 169). Panels 172 - 173 \ illustrate the flight of the English and subsequent Norman pursuit. \ For discussion of these individual events, see the commentary for \ the appropriate panel. Drogeriet (1962) argues that the \ Tapestry distinctly follows William of Poitiers\' account, while \ Brown (1990) and Barlow \ (2002, 106-107) argue that parts of the battle in the Tapestry \ follow the Carmen \ de Hastingae Proelio.
\The battle would have commenced in the morning and lasted \ all day, and would most likely have consisted of three or more \ Norman attacks on the entrenched English position, followed by \ periods of rest in between. As the sheer length of the battle \ attests, the forces appear to have been pretty evenly matched, and \ it is generally believed that had Harold not been killed, the \ battle could easily have gone the other way. For the geography of \ Battle Ridge and the surrounding environs, click on the thumbnail \ map to the right, or consult the panoramic videos in the "Map" \ section. Cole (1884, 185-221) contains a walking \ tour of the battlefield. Barlow (2002, 96ff.) surveys the events \ leading up to the actual battle and details possible timetables for \ Harold\'s journey south after his victory at Stamford \ Bridge. All contemporary historical accounts in the \ "Library" section of this edition contain details of the battle; \ Morillo (1996) provides most of these \ accounts, as well as a series of scholarly treatments on the \ various aspects of the battle. Bachrach \ (1986, 1-5) reviews arguments for the number of William\'s army and \ estimates it to have been approximately 14,000 (8,000 effectives, \ 2,000 garrison troops at Pevensey and Hastings, and 4,000 in ship\'s crews and \ other non-combatants, plus 2,000-3,000 horses), and estimates \ Harold\'s effectives to have been nearly equal in size. In his more \ specific estimate, Wright (1996, 55-57) makes \ allowances for overlap of functions among the Norman host \ (e.g. sailors doubling as infantry) and breaks down the \ Norman numbers to 2,000 cavalry, 800 archers, 3,000 infantry, 1,000 \ sailors and supply combatants. Wright also (58-60) provides a \ survey of the Norman nobility recorded by contemporary chronicles. \ For the Anglo-Saxon force, Wright (67-68) supposes 4,000 troops \ from Harold, Gyrth, and Leofwine\'s retinues, in addition to some \ 4,000 levied troops, and likewise surveys the English regions and \ specific figures recorded by contemporary chronicles as having \ fought at Hastings.
\The battle certainly would have been bloody; based on the size \ of the armies and the geography of the hill, Wright \ (1996, 103) estimates some 6,000 human and 600 equine casualties, \ and calculates that on the ridge of the battle, there were "at \ least six human bodies and a horse for every yard of hill." \ Sullivan (1999, 666-667), \ writing from a medical perspective, assesses the nature of wounds \ sustained during the battle:
\penetrating wounds and lacerations from arrows, \ javelins, lances, and battle axes must have been common; \ presumably, the cavalry sustained close head injuries . . . \ Certainly no record exists of surgical amputations being effected \ or wounds being repaired. Infections must have been highly \ prevalent for those who survived their initial penetrating \ injuries."
\Gameson (1997, 207-211) comments that \ the Tapestry\'s depiction of the battle is not strictly secular, and \ reinforces the traditional belief that William won the violent \ conflict by divine judgment. Caviness (50) maintains that the \ Tapestry leaves the background of the scenes of battle blank, "so \ that the viewer is free to imagine infinite space . . . [so that] \ each scene presents a series of confrontations, which may be \ understood either in temporal or in topographical sequence."
\Douglas (1964, 197ff.) and Brown (1981, \ 9-16) have concise summaries of the events of October 14, 1066. For \ sources and scholarly treatments of the event, see Morillo \ (1996). For a basic introduction to the battle, see Wright \ (1996).
\Index: battle of Hastings, Norman approach, panels 122 - \ 127; scouting, panels 128 - 133; Harold before, \ panel \ 133; William\'s speech before, panel 133; Norman\'s first charge, \ panels \ 134 - 144; first clash of, panel 144; archers in, panel 141, \ panel \ 145, panels 160 - 166 (borders); death of \ Leofwine and Gyrth, panels 150 - 151; malfosse \ episode(?), panels 155 - 158; Odo rallies troops, \ panel \ 158; William bares face, panel 160; Harold\'s death, panel 169; \ English flight, panels 172 - 173; scavengers of, \ panels \ 167 - 171.
'; events["Breton"]={"ref":"Breton","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Breton Campaign"}; events["Breton"].html='William\'s Breton Campaign
\Though some of the nobility of Brittany consented to the vassalage of \ Normandy, others maintained a fiercely independent devotion to \ their patria. According to Norman sources, in 1064, Count Conan \ II, who had finally consolidated his own rule in \ Britanny, declared his attempt to free parts of Brittany from \ Norman rule and possibly even went as far as to declare his intent \ to invade Normandy. Conan reportedly besieged the Breton city of \ Dol, whose leader, Rivallon of \ Cambour, remained loyal to William. In response, the \ Normans mounted a campaign to check Conan.
\In the Tapestry, panels 40 - 55 cover William\'s \ campaign, in which Harold was also a participant. Keats-Rohan (1991, 163) surmises that \ the events of this campaign "did most to determine the composition \ not only of the Breton conquerors of England after 1066, but also \ of all those who held land in England thereafter, until the death \ of King John in 1216." After crossing the Couesnon \ River (see panel 44) into Brittany, William lays \ siege to Dol, which Conan possibly occupies (see panels 45 - 47). \ When Conan abandons Dol, William pursues him to Rennes (see panel 49), and \ then to Dinan (see panel 52), where \ Conan surrenders. According to the Tapestry, Harold then receives \ arms from William and swears an oath of \ fealty to William (see panel 55 and \ panel \ 59). For a discussion of specific details and battles of this \ campaign, see the relevant panel commentary.
\William of Poitiers\' account of this event (Library: \ Poitiers (¶5)) is the only other early source \ which mentions William\'s expedition, and scholarly debate continues \ as to whether it differs from the Tapestry\'s depiction. Poitiers \ relates that Conan only besieged, and did not occupy, Dol, which \ was still held by Rivallon. Upon Duke William\'s arrival, Conan fled \ without any battle. Conan was then joined by substantial \ reinforcements, but continued his retreat into Brittany. William \ returned to Normandy, where Harold swore an oath of fealty and \ departed. Intriguingly, no resolution of the conflict with Conan \ appears in Poitiers\' account. Keats-Rohan (1991, 164-66) argues that \ given William\'s imminent designs on the English throne, and his \ chance hosting of Harold Godwinson, the duke here \ wished merely to "flex his muscles" in order to intimidate \ potential rivals both in Brittany and England. Keats-Rohan finds \ little evidence of Breton aggression in 1064. Therefore Keats-Rohan \ cautions against trusting Poitiers\' account, and further doubts \ that William actually relieved a siege of Dol by Conan, but rather \ entered Brittany through Dol and forced Conan to withdraw. The \ Tapestry, which implies engagements at two cities not mentioned \ elsewhere, and which moves Harold\'s oath until after Conan is \ defeated, glorifies Duke William\'s achievements even more than the \ pro-Norman Poitiers.
\Some scholars have read this section of the Tapestry as at \ odds with Poitiers\' chronicle. Gibbs-Smith (1957, 166-67), Brooks \ (1978, 3), and Bernstein (1986, 174) argue that the \ Tapestry simply has mistaken information about the siege of Dol, as \ Conan, not William held the city under siege, while Grape (1994, \ 57-58) believes that the Tapestry invents events in order more to \ glorify Duke William. Bachrach (1987, 11) states that Conan\'s \ flight towards Rennes and William\'s attack on Dinan "makes no \ logistic sense." However, earlier scholars such as Freeman \ (1875, 712) and Fowke (1898, 62) contend that the \ Tapestry\'s account of Dol does not necessarily clash with that of \ Poitiers. Brown (1985, 19), followed by Lewis (1999, \ 93), argues that the Bayeux Tapestry\'s version "obviously serves to \ render William greater glory than does the literary account." The \ account in the Tapestry provides a good example of how William \ could subdue a rebellious vassal and foreshadows Harold\'s own fate. \ Lewis also notes that this long episode in the Tapestry\'s narrative \ underscores the fact that William\'s power over Brittany helped him \ both to build up and test armies used in the invasion of England. \ Freeman (1991, 131) counts 26 horses \ and 44 men shown in the Tapestry for the campaign, as compared to \ 75 and 213 of the same for the Battle of Hastings, and remarks on \ the difference of the portrayal of these two military actions, \ believing the latter to be of higher quality.
\Bruce (1856, 61) notes that this \ campaign also provided Harold a good opportunity to study William \ in battle, while Gillingham (1996, 109-110) comments \ that Harold may have ironically gotten the wrong impression of \ William\'s battle tactics from his first-hand experiences in the \ attrition and siege-oriented Brittany campaign. This may have led \ to a fatal miscalculation at Hastings. Barlow \ (2002, 71) hazards that Poitiers cuts the account of the campaign \ at Dol short to minimize Harold\'s particiaption in it. Holmes \ (1957, 181) argues that two separate expeditions of William\'s \ campaign are here represented -- the lightly armed troops who \ travel through the quicksand and attack Dol (see \ panels 42 \ - 47), and a second, heavily armed troop which had "to go inland by \ Rennes and the head-waters of the Covesnon (sic), to the \ attack of Dinan, in which Harold is not necessarily involved" (see \ panels 48 \ - 54). Douglas (1964, 178-179) contains a full \ discussion of the details and effects of William\'s Breton campaign; \ Thorpe (1973, 32-55) reproduces the \ relevant sections of Poitiers\' account and briefly discusses its \ relation to the Tapestry.
\Index: William\'s Breton Campaign, depart for, \ panels 40 \ - 42; Mont St. Michel, panels 43 - 44; crossing the River \ Couesnon, panels 43 - 45; attack(?) on Dol and \ Conan\'s flight, panels 46 - 47; siege of Rennes(?), \ panels 48 \ - 49; attack on Dinan and Conan\'s surrender, panels 51 - 52; \ William gives arms to Harold, panel 55; Harold swears oath to \ William, panel 59.
'; events["Channel"]={"ref":"Channel","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Channel Crossing"}; events["Channel"].html='William\'s Channel Crossing
\Panels 81 - 101 portray the preparation \ for and execution of William\'s invasion of England, one of the \ largest naval operations of the period. Panel 80 shows \ William commanding the fleet to be built, while panels 81 - 86 \ illustrate the construction process from start to finish. In \ panels 87 \ - 92, soldiers load supplies for the invasion, and panels 93 - 101 \ depict William\'s fleet actually crossing the Channel.
\Based on the likelihood of a display in a secular hall, \ Swanton (1995, 167) regards the \ crossing as the "narrative climax of this story." Chroniclers\' \ estimations of the actual size of the fleet vary from Wace\'s 696 \ (Library: \ Wace (¦46)) to Gaimar\'s astronomical 11,000 \ (Library: Geffrei \ Gaimar (¦5)). Gillmor \ (1996, 114-15) examines all accounts and concludes that the fleet \ numbered somewhere around 700 vessels. Gillmor (118ff.) provides \ the most in-depth study to date on the construction of the ships, \ and the process by which William was able to assemble such a fleet. \ After studying the logistics of building all 700 ships new, and the \ historical evidence of ship quotas provided by William\'s vassals \ and mercenaries, Gillmor concludes that new ships were only built \ as a last resort (see also panel 81). William\'s force assembled in \ Dives-sur-Mer by early \ August of 1066, waited for a month, and then sailed north along the \ coast to St. \ Valery, where it waited for about fifteen days for \ opportune winds, and possibly news of Harold\'s movements against \ Tostig and Harold Hardrada in the north of England (see Glossary: Battle \ of Stamford Bridge). Chibnall \ (1998, xxvi.) suggests that, given the remarkable performance of \ William\'s troops at Hastings, the time at Dives and St. Valery must \ have been spent in intensive military practice. See also \ Wright (1996, 50-57) for a \ basic overview of the logistics of the crossing.
\Bachrach (1986, 3ff.), followed by \ Gillingham (1996, 110), thoroughly \ investigates the logistics of maintaining the estimated 14,000 men \ and 2-3,000 horses for a month at Dives-sur-Mer. Bachrach estimates \ William\'s camp to have been 200 acres in size, and argues that \ William would have consulted the writings on Roman or \ Romano-Byzantine military operations for advice on administrating \ such a camp. As Bachrach points out, the minimum nutritional intake \ of such an army would have required about 28 tons of unmilled \ grain, 17 tons of oats/barley, a like quantity of hay, and 39,000 \ gallons of fresh water a day, assuming that the troops "ate \ only cold wheat gruel day in and day out and drank only water," \ which was unlikely. In addition to somewhere in the neighbourhood \ of 8,000-12,000 horseshoes and 75,000 nails, a total of about 8 \ tons of iron, Gillingham notes supplies would have also \ included:
\9,000 cartloads of grain, straw, wine, and \ firewood, the river of 700,000 gallons of urine that horses would \ have produced, and the mountain of five-million pounds of \ horse-shit which it would have taken 5,000 cartloads to remove \ (presumably, on sanitary grounds, not the same carts as those that \ brought in the food and drink) (15).
\Douglas (1964, 189-90) and Brown (1993, \ 59, n. 17) also review evidence of lists of William\'s ship quotas. \ Hollister (1987, 243) gives the number \ of ships contributed by Norman nobles according to William\'s \ Ship List (Library: Ship List of William the \ Conqueror); Robert of \ Mortain and Odo of Bayeux lead the list with 120 \ and 100 ships, respectively. Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169), among others, \ notes that the fleet was in all likelihood assembled and/or \ constructed at Dives-sur-Mer, a traditional boat-building center in \ the eleventh century, situated fourteen miles northeast of Caen. \ Grainge (1996, 130-142) precisely \ documents the military and meteorological conditions that \ occasioned William\'s dangerous movement of his fleet from Dives to \ St. Valery in mid-September, and his delay of departure until \ September 28-29. This study discounts the possibility that William \ was waiting for Anglo-Saxon naval levies to disband and concludes \ that William had to wait so long simply because until the end of \ September, there were no fair winds to be had. Rud (1996, \ 64-65) provides a concise summary of Lieutenant-Colonel Charles H. \ Lemmon\'s analysis of the timing of the sea crossing:
\On the day of departure (September 29th) the sun \ set at 17.34 hours, and a six-day old half-moon disappeared at \ 21.15 hours. Because of the tide, it had been necessary to be on \ the open sea at 18.30 hours. Next morning sunrise was at 6.04 \ hours. Wind and weather conditions seem to have been ideal and the \ fleet reached the English coast at Pevensey at about 8.30 \ hours.
\Grainge (137-141) provides a detailed \ reconstruction of each stage of the Channel crossing, complete with \ estimated drift, speed, and winds; Neumann \ (1989, passim) studies the crossing in terms of the effect \ of tides, tidal streams, and winds in relation to the \ hydrodynamic aspects (sails, draught, length, and speed) of both \ surviving and depicted Norman ships. Bachrach (3-4) reminds us that \ William most likely lost several ships in the crossing, and in the \ earlier journey from Dives-sur-Mer to St. Valery; a number of ships \ did not reach Pevensey, but instead landed at Romney, where they \ incurred heavy losses to local resistance. Rudkin \ (1928, 60-63) provides a detailed assessment of the possible \ landing areas around both Pevensey and Pevensey Bay, examines \ several local traditions pertaining to the Norman landfall, and \ concludes that relatively few of William\'s fleet actually landed at \ Pevensey and that the bulk of ships made landfall across a group of \ sites around Pevensey Bay.
\The ships of the fleet appear to have performed different \ purposes, as some ships functioned as troop-ships, while others \ served as horse transports (see individual panels for each ship). \ Brown (1993, 62-63) breaks the ships \ represented into three classes: large transports carrying horses \ and their grooms, large ships carrying cavalry knights with their \ shields, and smaller ships carrying infantry and archers. It is \ generally accepted that William\'s flagship, the Mora, is \ found at the center of this fleet (see panel 98). \ Gibbs-Smith (1957, 170) comments on the \ “mass effect” that the variation of size and overlap of \ structures gives to the fleet in the Tapestry. Gillmor \ (1996, 119-122) studies the types of invasion ships represented in \ the Tapestry. See also Glossary: Ships and Glossary: Norman \ Shipbuilding.
\Index: Channel Crossing, panels 92 - 101, \ Museum: Normans \ in a Ship; William orders the construction of the \ fleet, panel 80; cutting wood for ships, \ panels 81 \ - 83; construction of fleet, panels 83 - 84; launching fleet, \ panels 85 \ - 86; supplies for, panels 87 - 90; William\'s flagship, \ panel 98; \ unloading horses from, panel 101, Museum: \ Ladby; landed ships, panels 102 - 103; see also Glossary: \ Ships and Glossary: Norman \ Shipbuilding.
'; events["Claims"]={"ref":"Claims","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Claims to England"}; events["Claims"].html='Claims to the Throne
\Bates (2001, 77) notes that in the \ peaceful successions in England in the tenth and eleventh \ centuries, the candidates all possessed three qualifications: a \ blood relationship to previous kings, designation by the reigning \ king, and the acceptance of the English nobility. Unfortunately, \ when King \ Edward the Confessor died in early January of 1066 \ without any children or surviving siblings, the Witan, the body of \ nobility who could ratify a new ruler by vote, had no candidate who \ fulfilled all these criteria. This entry will rehearse in brief the \ claims of the figures who did seek the throne in the following \ year.
\
\
Edgar Atheling: The only surviving male from the \
royal English line was, however, somewhat removed from Edward\'s \
direct bloodline; Edgar descended from Æthelred \
II by his first wife, Ælfgifu of Northhampton, while \
Edward\'s mother was Æthelred\'s second wife, the Norman \
Emma. \
Further, Edgar was the great-grandson of Æthelred, the \
grandson of Edmund Ironside, and the son of Edward the Exile, who \
died shortly after Edward brought about his return to England from \
Hungary in 1057. Because of this distance from Edward\'s line, \
Freeman \
(1875, 6) points out that Edgar would have had no constitutional \
claim to the throne, unlike a direct descendant of Edward. However, \
as John \
(1979, 257), Walker (1997, 81-83) and others state, \
Edward must have intended Edward the Exile to succeed him. \
Barlow (2002, 58-59) considers the \
title atheling proof enough that Edgar was throne-worthy, \
and notes that Harold himself may have participated in the \
Continental mission which brought Edward the Exile and Edgar back \
to England. Barlow later (89) notes, however, that the one recent \
precedent for a child king, Edward the Martyr (murdered in 978), \
could not have been encouraging. At Edward the Exile\'s death in \
1057, King Edward was 55, and likely hoped to live long enough to \
see Edgar come to age. However, in 1066, Edgar was about fifteen \
years of age, and his youth, in combination with a persona which \
Freeman describes as one "wholly unfit for rule" (6) made him a \
less than palatable candidate for the throne, and there is no \
indication that Edward designated him as heir. Upon Harold\'s death \
at Hastings, a somewhat lackluster movement gathered around him in \
support, but Edgar ended such efforts with his submission to \
William at Berkhamstead in December of 1066 (cf. \
Stenton \
(1971, 596-597)).
\
\
For a full treatment of Edgar\'s career, see Hooper (1985, \
197-214).
\
Harald Hardrada, king of Norway: The younger brother of King \
Olaf of Norway, Harald Hardrada ("Hard-ruler") was exiled in 1030 \
at the age of 15 for his opposition to the Danish king Cnut\'s \
usurpation of Olaf. After exploits in Russia, Byzantium, and \
Sicily, Harald returned to Norway and succeeded his nephew Magnus \
to the throne in 1047. Failing to conquer Denmark in the early \
1060s, Harald turned his attention to England after King Edward\'s \
death. Norwegians had previously opposed Harold Godwinson in 1058, \
when Harald\'s son, also named Magnus, commanded a fleet which aided \
the Welsh king Gruffydd ap Llywelyn\'s war against the English earl. \
In 1065, Tostig, Harold Godwinson\'s brother and earl of \
Northumbria, fled England after Edward ordered his removal, and at \
some point in that year or the next negotiated with Harald for \
military aid in his attempted return. Harald\'s claim was \
complicated and tenuous -- his cousin Magnus had apparently \
negotiated with Harthacnut, the son of Cnut and dual king of \
England and Denmark, that he should be Harthacnut\'s heir. By \
Harthacnut\'s sudden death in 1042, however, he had designated his \
half-brother Edward, then in England, as successor, and Magnus \
spent the next five years before his death planning for an invasion \
of England. In 1066, the royal vacuum in England, Tostig\'s request, \
and Harald\'s desire for more conquest convinced him that the kings \
of Norway were the legitimate heirs to England. Harald and Tostig \
were killed, however, by Harold\'s forces on September 25, 1066, at \
the Battle of Stamford Bridge (Glossary: Stamford \
Bridge). For a full discussion of Harald \
Hardrada and his invasion of England, see DeVries (1999, 23-68 \
and 230-299). Note: in early accounts of the events of 1066, Harald \
Hardrada is often confused with the earlier Norwegian King Harald \
Harfagr ("Fairhair").
\
Harold Godwinson, earl of Wessex: Harold, next to Edward \
perhaps the most powerful man in England, possessed no \
traditionally legitimate claim to the English throne. His sister \
Edith was Edward\'s wife and queen, but \
such a connection was not normally grounds for inheritance, though \
he also perhaps had some tenuous links to the throne through \
Scandinavian connections. Though Norman and English sources differ \
in their interpretation of Harold\'s actions after Edward\'s death, \
almost all agree that on his deathbed King Edward entrusted the \
English state to Harold (see panel 70). If Edward had earlier in the \
1050s considered William of Normandy as a potential heir to England \
(see below), he appears to have rethought this position. Choosing \
Harold made good political sense: Edward was without an heir, and \
rulers in Normandy, Norway, and possibly even in Denmark or \
Flanders might also lay claim to the throne, and the exiled Tostig \
of Northumberland (see above) would likely return in force as well. \
In short, England could be turned into a veritable invasion zone. \
Additionally, though the choice of a figure not of royal blood may \
have seemed strange to some, Harold may have worked hard in advance \
to insure internal support for his bid to the throne -- he held \
most of the south of England, curried favor from the north by \
supporting the 1065 uprising against his brother Tostig there, and \
reached out to Mercia -- obtaining large estates there in \
1065-1066, supporting the installation of Morcar, the earl of \
Mercia Edwin\'s brother to the earldom of Northumbria, and finally \
by marrying Ealdgyth, the sister of these two earls shortly after \
his succession. The Anglo-Saxon witan, representative of the \
nobility and no doubt equally nervous about the defense of England, \
ratified this choice without recorded dissent the day after \
Edward\'s death. Norman sources, however, read Harold\'s accession to \
the throne as treason, claiming he had previous sworn an oath of \
vassalage to William (see panel 59), and thereby justified \
William\'s invasion (see also Glossary: The \
Coronation of Harold).
\
\
For treatments of Harold\'s claim, see Barlow \
(2002, 83-95), John (1979, 262-267), Walker (1997, \
114-119), DeVries (1999, 160-165), and \
Freeman \
(1875, 3-47 and 579-616).
\
William, duke of Normandy: William\'s claim to the throne \
arose from three arguments: his blood relation to Edward, Edward\'s \
earlier promise of the English crown to him, and Harold\'s oath of \
vassalage to him. William was the grandson of Duke Richard II \
of Normandy, whose sister, Emma, was Edward\'s mother (see the \
"Genealogy" section in this edition). Edward had spent some \
twenty-five years of his life in exile in Normandy, and had \
consequently developed a distinctively pro-Norman bias in the early \
part of his reign. Therefore, it is possible that at sometime in \
the early 1050s, Edward did make some sort of promise to William \
that he would be designated heir to England. One version of the \
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, version D, records that William \
actually visited Edward in 1051 (see discussion in Barlow (2002, \
43, 47)). Alternatively, however, William may have been told of \
such a promise by disgruntled Normans from England, such as Robert \
of Jumièges (cf. Walker (1997, 50-51)). \
Predictably, in his book on the Godwin family, Barlow \
(2002, 75) argues that "there is no good evidence that Edward ever \
or consistently regarded William as his heir," while in his book on \
William, Bates (2001, 73) writes that "there is \
broad agreement among scholars that Edward promised the succession \
to William during the year 1051."
Regardless of the source of the claim or its verity, in the \
years leading up to Edward\'s death, William felt that the English \
throne was his to claim, and had perhaps even insured against \
English competition by extracting an oath of fealty from Harold in \
1064 (see panel 59). Harold\'s accession to the \
throne, in Norman eyes, was then viewed as perjury and treason, and \
provided William with a casus belli to invade England by \
force and take the crown through conquest.
\
\
For discussions of William\'s claim, see Bates (2001, \
73-79), Oleson (1957, 221-228), Douglas (1964, \
164-180), John (1979, 253ff.), Freeman (1875, \
267-286), and Walker (1997, \
91-102).
Edward\'s death in the Bayeux Tapestry is represented through a \ reversed chronology that begins with Westminster Abbey in panel 66 and ends \ in panel \ 70 with Edward\'s deathbed scene. Like the earlier reversal in \ panels 22 \ - 27, this sequence clearly starts with the end. The Tapestry here \ first depicts the final resting place of King Edward, then his \ funeral procession, then his shrouding, and finally his death \ scene. Hart (2000, 129 and fig. 2) cites six \ examples from Canterbury manuscripts which he believes were used to \ create the depiction of Edward\'s death.
\Though Stenton (1957, 16-17) writes that this \ is "a curious dislocation of events . . . for which a convincing \ explanation cannot be easily found," and Verrier \ (1946, 16) considers the reversal a mistake of the embroiderers, \ several other scholars have proposed solutions which relate \ Edward\'s death to Harold\'s coronation. Bruce (1856, \ 75-76), Freeman (1875, 587, 601), Brooks \ (1978, 21), Parisse (1986, 75-76), and Grape (1994, \ 71) all contend that the importance of the reordering is the direct \ juxtaposition of the scene of Edward\'s death in panel 70 with \ that of Harold\'s acceptance of the English crown. The significance \ of such positioning, unfortunately, is also open to a wide spectrum \ of speculation, and could be read as an indication of Edward\'s \ dying behest of the throne to Harold, or alternately as an emphatic \ highlight of Harold\'s swift and perjurious usurpation. In relation, \ Gibbs-Smith (1973, 9) suggests that the \ reverse sequence may have arisen because the designer had \ inhibitions about depicting Westminster Abbey alongside of Harold\'s \ coronation. Parisse (76) views this scene as a "flashback" which \ conforms to the unity of time, and Bernstein (1986, 20) regards this \ episode as an attempt "to give clarity to momentous events that \ followed each other with extraordinary rapidity"; to highlight the \ narrative effect of the reversal, Bernstein (20-21) also reproduces \ the scenes from the Tapestry in correct chronological order.
\Thompson (1999, 112ff.) rejects the \ common argument that the order was reversed simply for a dramatic \ connection between Edward\'s dying words and Harold\'s coronation in \ panel 72. \ Grape (1994, 70) argues, without \ clarification, that the reversal is a device which indicates \ simultaneity. Bertrand (1997, 31-32) argues that the \ scene is not inverted, but follows a literary model which first \ describes Edward\'s funeral, and then that the king had just \ recently conversed with his faithful followers. However, McNulty \ (1989, 17) observes that it is not only the narrative order, but \ the actual motion of these scenes which has been reversed, a \ concept integral to understanding more about the possible reasons \ behind this shift. Cetto (1970, 8) ingeniously suggests \ that the reversal of scene here has to do with the structural \ placement of the textile inside of the space of a cathedral. As \ such, the reversal must be read in situ as echoing its \ audience who stood inside the cathedral. The placement of this \ scene demanded oppositive motion in order to parallel and not \ mirror the movement of an actual funeral procession into the nave \ of Bayeux Cathedral.
\Gosling (1990, 77) believes that the \ narrative of the Tapestry is divided into two parts; the first part \ ends with Edward\'s funeral while the second part begins with \ Edward\'s deathbed scene. Bachrach (1987, 7) notes that the \ funeral and deathbed scenes occur on either side of a joining in \ the Tapestry (cf. Introduction: Manufacture & Length), and \ argues that the chronological reversal is, in fact, a careless \ mistake. Indeed, a close study of the architectural detail of the \ link between Edward\'s palace in the previous panel and the abbey, \ and the left-hand detail of Edward\'s deathbed scene in panel 70 reveals \ strong similarities in the two structures, and enhances the \ possibility that these scenes may have been confused. Koslin \ (1990, 37-42) argues that the original design may have been pricked \ on paper, and that the reverse side may have been mistakenly \ applied to the linen. Koslin also provides a "corrected" \ illustration of this sequence.
\In panels 68 - 69, Edward\'s funeral bier \ is carried to Westminster Abbey by a party of eight men, \ accompanied by two diminutive figures who walk beneath the bier \ holding bells and a group of singing clerics. Panel 70 shows the \ final moments and subsequent shrouding of the king. The king\'s \ palace is here divided into two separate but related scenes. Above, \ Edward speaks from his deathbed to four of his subjects, a group \ that presumably includes Harold and Queen \ Edith, Harold\'s sister; the king\'s hand touches \ Harold\'s hand. A tonsured, stubbled cleric, possibly Archbishop \ Stigand, grants a blessing, while a fourth figure, \ tentatively identified as Robert the Staller (Rodbert fitz \ Wimarch), supports the king from behind. A double curtain tied off \ on posts frames the death-scene. Below this scene, a cleric, \ presumably the same figure as above, and two other men prepare and \ shroud the body.
\As the death of a king was no small matter, and as Edward the \ Confessor\'s death was the event from which the Norman Conquest \ directly stems, all accounts of the period mention the matter. The \ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 1065-66 (Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶1)) sets his death on the eve of \ the Epiphany (January 5), and his burial the next day. As Freeman \ (1875, 586) first noted, and as most subsequent scholars agree, \ this scene closely resembles the description of Edward\'s death \ presented in the anonymous Vita Ædwardi (commissioned \ by Edward\'s wife, Edith; see Library: Vita (¶3, and notes)). \ According to this account, Edward died in the company of Harold, \ Edith, Archbishop Stigand, Robert the Staller, and a few others, \ and the queen sat on the floor warming Edward\'s feet. Before he \ dies, the king commends to Harold his wife and all the kingdom to \ his protection (tutandam). If, as Brown (1977, \ 59-61) argues, the designer of the Tapestry used the Vita as \ a direct source, the identification of the four figures at Edward\'s \ deathbed is relatively easy. More difficult, however, is \ ascertaining the significance of Edward\'s final gesture. Wilson \ (1985, 183) takes the gesture at face value, and states that here \ Edward appoints Harold as his successor as "his finger touches that \ of Harold, symbolic of his bequest of the kingdom." Though the C \ and D versions are suspiciously silent on the matter, the E version \ of the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶2) reports that Harold assumed \ the throne "just as the king had granted it to him."
\Norman sources are less clear about the situation. William of \ Jumièges (Library: Jumièges (¶3)) \ mentions only that Harold usurped the throne, while William of \ Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶29)) writes that Harold \ claims to William via messenger that Edward granted him the \ English crown on his deathbed. Additionally, Brown (1984, \ 59) reevaluates the rhetoric of the Vita Ædwardi and \ considers the possibility that Edward only put his kingdom in \ Harold\'s safekeeping until William\'s arrival. Even the issue of \ Edward\'s mental condition at the time of his death has been raised, \ as Douglas (1964, 182) discusses Edward\'s \ deathbed bequest as possibly coerced or prompted by senility, and \ finds suspicion in the "indecent haste" of the proceedings after \ the king\'s passing. Finally, Cowdrey (1997, 107) contrasts the \ Tapestry\'s depiction of Edward\'s death with the Vita \ Ædwardi, and claims that the latter obscures Edward\'s \ behest, while the former "seems designed to display the events of \ the death-bed much more clearly." Lesieur \ (1992, 177-179) argues that the scene provides a deliberate \ ambiguity in reference to Norman and English versions of Edward\'s \ death and Harold\'s assumption of the throne, and thus would support \ oppositive readings from both pro-English or pro-Norman viewers. \ Particularly, Lesieur distinguishes Edward\'s hand gesture from his \ solidly iconic gestures of authority found elsewhere in the \ Tapestry.
\Thompson (1999, 114ff.) draws on \ medieval belief that kingship survives the death of the mortal \ king, and asserts that the post mortem appearance of Edward \ represents the "kingly aspect" of Edward that initially passes on \ to Harold and then is fought for by William. Commenting on the \ "split-screen" nature of the depiction, Thompson (115-116) further \ considers Edward here situated "on the boundary between life and \ death . . . he is no longer the vertical king nor yet the \ horizontal corpse." Ultimately (118), Thompson argues that the \ depiction of Edward\'s death transcends national concerns and \ focuses instead on monastic understanding of the Christian \ institution of kingship. The vagueness of political message, \ Thompson suggests, may be rooted in such a religious concern, \ combined with the subtle criticism that Edward made a mistake on \ his deathbed in nominating Harold.
'; events["Comet"]={"ref":"Comet","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Halley's Comet"}; events["Comet"].html='Halley\'s Comet
\It is generally agreed that the comet shown in panel 75 is \ Halley\'s comet, which would have first appeared in February, \ reached its perihelion on March 27, attained maximum brightness in \ April, and remained visible well into May. Wright \ (1996, 36) stresses that in 1066 the comet would have appeared many \ times brighter than it did in its 1985/6 appearance, as in 1066 it \ passed between the earth and the sun, rather than on the far side \ of the sun. Every major English and Norman chronicle but Eadmer \ mentions it. Indeed, as Freeman (1875, 645-650) demonstrates, \ historians all across western and eastern Europe recorded sightings \ of this comet.
\Not surprisingly, Norman sources interpret this "hairy star" to \ a partisan advantage. William of Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶46)), William of Jumièges \ (Library: \ Jumièges (¶3)), and Orderic Vitalis \ (Library: \ Orderic (¶1)) all view the comet as an ill-omen \ which foretells the perjurious Harold\'s doom. Though the author of \ the Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (Library: Carmen \ (¶5)) moves comet\'s appearance to William\'s Channel-crossing \ for dramatic effect, he also writes that it "proclaimed to the \ English foreordained destruction" (Anglis fatatum nunciat \ excidium). The A, C, and D versions of the Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (Library: Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¶2)) all mention the appearance of the comet, but do not \ comment upon its significance.
\For interpretations of the appearance of the comet in the \ Tapestry, see the commentary for panel 75; for an excellent appendix of \ chronicles which mention the comet in 1066, see Freeman \ (1875, 645-650); for a bibliography of scholarship on the comet, \ see Thomson (1998, Vol. 2, 211-212).
\Index: Halley\'s Comet, panel 75.
'; events["Coronati"]={"ref":"Coronati","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Harold's Coronation"}; events["Coronati"].html='Harold\'s Coronation
\Panels 71 - 72 depict Harold\'s \ coronation in two episodes. In panel 71, two men stand before Harold; \ one points to the earl and offers him an axe, the other points back \ to Edward\'s death-scene and offers the earl a crown. Harold looks \ to these men with one hand on his hip and the other one holding \ another axe. In panel 72, Harold, now mustachioed, sits \ enthroned as king, holding the royal scepter and orb and wearing \ the royal crown. On his right, two noblemen point to him, and one \ of them holds up the sword of state. On his left, Archbishop \ Stigand stands with his arms outstretched, holding a \ maniple.
\It is possible that the first scene depicts an official \ meeting and decision of the Witan to offer Harold the English \ crown. As it was Christmas, much of the Witan would have been \ present at court, and such a decision would have been greatly \ expedited. Several scholars, however, have commented on the haste \ of these proceedings and consider this scene a sign of a hurried \ and private decision. Freeman (1875, 602), followed by \ Lewis (1999, 110), reads \ juxtapositioning of death and crown literally and supporting \ Edward\'s dying wish: "The crown is evidently brought from the \ chamber of the dead king, and the story would run just as well if \ it were brought simply in obedience to his dying orders, without \ reference to the choice of anyone else." Likewise Stenton \ (1957, 17) regards this episode as a "private scene" which "takes \ no account of the formalities of election which were the normal \ preliminaries to the crowning of the king," while Wilson \ (1985, 183) believes that Harold is offered the crown as he his \ told about the death of the king. Brown (1985, \ 21) follows William of Jumièges (Library: \ Jumièges (¶3)), who reports that the \ coronation took place immediately upon Edward\'s death, and argues \ that the men here could not be the Witan, and "may perhaps be \ better seen as the English \'partisans\' who upheld Harold\'s claim to \ the throne." William of Poitiers (Library: Poitiers (¶11)) similarly \ writes that Harold seized the throne at the urging of iniquitous \ supporters. The Brevis Relatio ( Library: Brevis \ Relatio (¦1)) reports an oral tradition that \ Harold seized the throne "as if insane." Lewis (110) asserts that \ the ambiguity of the scene leaves the option to the viewer to see \ Harold as traitor to William or as faithful subject to Edward. See \ the commentary in panel 71 for discussion of particular \ details in this scene; for a discussion of the juxtaposition of \ this scene to that of Edward\'s death, see Glossary: King \ Edward\'s Death.
\Though all contemporary sources report that Harold assumed \ the kingship, few give any details of the actual coronation. The \ Brevis Relatio (Library: Brevis Relatio (¦1)) \ gives St. Paul\'s as the location for Harold\'s coronation, though \ this could be a mistake of oral transmission; other sources do not \ mention a location by name, but generally imply that Harold crowned \ himself where and when Edward was buried (i.e. St. Peter\'s at \ Westminster). William of Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶11)) writes that the event took \ place on the day of Edward\'s death (January 5), and was performed \ with the "unholy consecration" of Stigand. Orderic Vitalis \ (Library: \ Orderic (¶2)) follows Poitiers\' account \ closely, adding only that the pope had suspended Stigand from \ divine service for various misdeeds. Though the Tapestry follows \ these Norman accounts and clearly shows Stigand present at the \ ceremony, some scholars have questioned whether he actually \ officiated. Stenton (1957, 18) notes that the \ earliest English reference to the coronation comes a generation \ later in the chronicle of John of Worcester ((Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¦2)), who asserts that Harold was \ consecrated by Ealdred, archbishop of York. Stenton favors this \ account, stating that "[Ealdred\'s] canonical position was \ unchallengeable, and the tradition which gives him the essential \ part in Harold\'s coronation is set down by a writer with \ unexceptional means of learning the truth." However, Stenton \ earlier (12) concedes that Stigand must have wielded enough \ influence that the Tapestry shows "that he was allowed at least a \ secondary part in the ceremonies of King Harold\'s coronation." \ Chibnall (138, n. 1), Brown (1984, 58, n. 63), and Nelson \ (1986, 393) observe that the later York chronicle also preserves \ Ealdred as the figure who consecrated Harold. Barlow \ (2002, 91) reviews which ceremonial ordo would have been \ used, depending on the presider, and that the same cleavage of \ opinion over the identity of the presider occurs in accounts of \ William\'s coronation as well. He also (79) points out that in 1060, \ Stigand, who then held the sees of Canterbury and Winchester in \ plurality, was specifically excluded by Harold from the dedication \ of the earl\'s endowed church at Waltham. Conversely, Grape (1994, \ 123) views the fact that Stigand here holds the maniple as an \ indication that the Tapestry specifically suggests that Stigand \ performed the coronation. Cowdrey (1997, 103) provides the \ contemporary meaning of the maniple through the prayer of the \ cleric who assumes it: "Da, Domine, virtutem manibus meis ad \ abstergendam omnem maculam immundam (Give strength, Lord, to my \ hands to wipe away every unclean blemish"). Cowdrey interprets the \ maniple as ironic, given Stigand\'s uncanonical history.
\Whether or not Stigand actually officiated is, however, \ practically moot, as the Tapestry specifically focuses on him in \ any case. Wilson (1985, 182) reminds us that the \ primary purpose of the Tapestry is that of Norman propaganda. \ Therefore, the inclusion of Stigand, a several-time excommunicated \ figure, sanctioned by an anti-pope, only fuels the self-righteous \ flames of William\'s opposition. Grape (56) examines the figuration \ of the scene, and purports that "the rigidly frontal pose of the \ figures is an alienation device: it serves to unmask the perfidious \ collusion between the two men." Nelson (394-395) also reads this \ scene as propaganda, but proposes a possible second meaning in the \ inclusion of Stigand as a reference to Canterbury politics, \ specifically, "Stigand\'s patronage of St. Augustine\'s at the \ expense of Christ Church." Lewis (1999, 112-113) views the \ inclusion of Stigand as a strategy which prevents the scene\'s \ closing off of the Norman view of Harold as perjurious usurper \ through the representation of a second usurper. Lewis further notes \ that Stigand was one of the wealthiest landholders in England both \ before and after the Conquest, and that as such he would be a \ significant rival and threat to Odo of \ Bayeux\'s own program to gain and maintain power in \ England. Garnett (1986b, 96ff.) documents how \ Norman claims of a legal succession from Edward to William were \ problematized by the fact of Harold\'s coronation, and the Norman \ strategies by which this ceremony could nevertheless be \ invalidated.
\In conjunction with the debate of which archbishop \
presided, critics have also questioned whether this scene shows the \
actual coronation at all. Stenton (1957, 17) argues that this \
episode passes over the ceremony and goes directly to the \
acclamation of the king, where he is presented to his subjects. \
Brooks (1978, 20-21), on the other \
hand, reads this scene as a triptych of the three distinct stages \
in the ceremony. The left side shows the offering of the sword of \
state, in the center the king sits crowned in majesty with his \
royal objects, and the right side has Archbishop Stigand with a \
maniple on his arm either presenting the king\'s acclamation of the \
people or summoning them to pay homage. However, this scene might \
also represent another part of the ceremony, that of the \
recognito. Morton and Muntz (1972, lviii) describe \
the coronation recognitio as the process by which the \
subjects make promises of obedience and loyalty. The king then made \
a royal oath in response and then "took the form of a \
mandatum, or charge to them to protect the church, put down \
evils, and show justice and mercy." This episode, with subjects on \
either side of Harold gesturing towards him, may also incorporate \
elements of this ceremonial feature. Cowdrey \
(1997, 103) dismisses the idea that the Tapestry might represent \
the stages of the coronation and instead argues that it should be \
understood "as an icon of his kingship." Belloc \
(1914, plate 31) perhaps put it most succinctly when he argued that \
the primary message of this scene was to say, "See here! Harold did \
really seize the throne!"
\
\
See the commentary in panel 72 for a discussion of other \
particular details in this scene.
Harold\'s Death
\In panels 168 - 170, a final group of \ Anglo-Saxon soldiers unsuccessfully defend against a two-sided \ Norman attack, which breaks through their line. At the center of \ the scene, a mustachioed Anglo-Saxon, possibly Harold, pulls an \ arrow out of his head. Behind him, a mounted Norman knight cuts \ down an axe-wielding Anglo-Saxon, who also might be \ Harold.
\All contemporary and near-contemporary accounts of \ Hastings record Harold\'s death, though the details often vary. The \ Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, versions D and E (Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶6)) provides the sparest account, \ mentioning only that the king was killed with his brothers Gyrth \ and Leofwine (see panels 150 - \ 151). William of Poitiers (Library: Poitiers (¶45)) also \ gives little detail, noting only that the king was found with his \ brothers, and that he could not be recognized by his face, but by \ certain other markings. William of Jumièges (Library: \ Jumièges (¶7)) and Orderic Vitalis \ (Library: \ Orderic (¶17)) state that Harold fell in the \ first attack of the battle, pierced with lethal wounds. The \ Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (Library: \ Carmen (¶30)) provides the fullest description, \ though probably the most embellished one. It recounts how William \ cleaved Harold\'s breast with his spear point, Eustace of \ Boulogne decapitated him, Hugh of Ponthieu pierced \ the innards of his stomach, while Giffard (possibly Walter Giffard) \ hacked off his thigh and carried it away. Importantly, no early \ source (save perhaps the Tapestry itself) mentions that Harold was \ killed by an arrow to the eye -- such a detail only occurs in the \ later chronicles of Wace (Library: Wace (¶140)), William of \ Malmesbury (Library: \ Malmesbury (¶15), and Henry Huntington \ (Library: \ Huntingdon (¶6)), and in the less historically \ oriented Adelae Comitissae by Baudri de Bourgeuil (Library: \ Baudri (¶9)), though all of these works may \ have been influenced directly or indirectly by the Tapestry itself \ (see below).
\The Tapestry provides no clear evidence for the exact \ details of Harold\'s death, but does raise some suggestive and \ sometimes contradictory possibilities. The question of Harold\'s \ identity in this scene has never been completely settled. Several \ scholars assert that Harold is the figure cut down by the Norman \ horseman, while others believe that he is the soldier attempting to \ remove an arrow from his head, or possibly both of these figures \ together. Morton \ and Muntz (1972, 119-20 and Plate IVb) argue that \ this scene closely parallels the account in the Carmen and \ shows four knights, one of whom slices Harold\'s thigh. Likewise, \ Shirley Ann Brown in Brown (1977, 92), Brown (1985, \ 24), and again in Brown (1990, 17-20) contends that the \ Tapestry\'s depiction of the deaths of Harold and his housecarls \ appears to be a direct borrowing from this source.
\This parallel would suggest, as Thorpe \ (1973, 20) believes, that the second Anglo-Saxon here is indeed the \ only Harold. Gibbs-Smith (1973, 15) provides the \ fullest argument to this end, and examines Stothard\'s 1818 \ facsimile to show that a later restoration attempted to manipulate \ the arrow-wounded man to conform to later accounts of Harold\'s \ death by arrow (see Facsimile: Stothard, panel 198). \ Gibbs-Smith also observes that in the 1730 illustration of \ Montfaucon (Facsimile: Montfaucon, panel 183) and \ other pre-Stothard reproductions that "the arrow is also shown \ going nowhere near the eye of the figure." Grape (1994, \ 24) also discounts the possibility that this figure is Harold. \ Grape argues that the arrow-death of Harold is wrongfully restored \ and, on the basis of the other arrow injuries to Anglo-Saxons \ around Harold, that this figure originally held a spear, not an \ arrow. Gibbs-Smith (1966, 9) believes that the \ designer originally intended this figure to be a third man hefting \ a spear, but then decided not to have any more horizontal lines \ cutting through the scene, and so substituted an arrow after the \ raised arm was already stitched, concluding: "But in the man\'s eye, \ the arrow is not, nor was it ever." Dawson (1907, 288) notes \ that Montfaucon\'s engravings show no arrow, and that Stothard\'s \ painting shows a suggested arrow, and deduces that a later \ restoration added an actual arrow. Brown (1993, \ 66) argues that Baudri de Bourgeuil (Library: \ Baudri (¦9)) misread the Tapestry in his work \ and therefore gave rise to the false tradition of the arrow in the \ eye. However, Brooks (1978, 27) comments that \ Baudri\'s work is obscure at best, and doubtfully the precursor to \ such a widespread tradition. See also, though Amato of \ Montecassino\'s L\'Ystoire de li Normant Library: \ Montecassino (¦1), a late eleventh-century \ Italian chronicle which does report that Harold died by an \ arrow.
\Many other critics, however, believe that Harold is depicted \ multiple times in the final moments of his life. Early scholars, \ such as Stothard (1821, 190) and Bruce (1856, \ 148) believed that Harold was shown three times: once in panel 168 (in \ front of the standard bearer), and twice in panel 169. \ Verrier (1946, 38-9) reads the scene of \ death in two stages: "King Harold is struck in the eye by a dart \ which he himself withdraws and smashes; he fights on with the \ strength of dispair (sic), but at last, weakened by his injury, he \ falls under the blows of one of the enemy." Stenton \ (1957, 22) considers it certain that the man struck down by sword \ is indeed Harold, but readily admits the possibility of a \ "double-death" scene, as does Brown (1981, 18). Stephens \ (1993, 56) examines the posture of Harold\'s "second" killer and \ believes that it indicates Norman "violations of acceptable bounds \ of warfare." He also compares it to Harold\'s stance in panel 64 and \ contends that both figures represent a form of shame.
\The study of Harold\'s death by Brooks \ (1978, 25-34) is widely regarded as the most authoritative and \ convincing. In his study, Brooks also argues for a dual \ representation of Harold. Though he dismisses the accuracy and \ influence of Baudri\'s work (see above), he does comment that \ Baudri, writing a scant 35 years after the incident, would be in a \ far better position to understand and interpret a representation of \ Harold\'s death than a modern scholar. He also discusses William of \ Malmesbury and Wace\'s accounts of Harold\'s death by arrow and the \ probability that both of these chronicles also drew on the \ Tapestry, or at the very least analogous reports, for information. \ For Brooks, these accounts "may be taken to confirm that the \ interpretation of the arrow-in-the-eye figure as Harold was natural \ to a medieval spectator." Barlow (1999, lxxxiii-lxxxiv) believes \ that the dual representation in the Tapestry is the only way to \ solve the dilemma, but that to suggest "that the librettist was \ aware of different versions of the king\'s death, and showed both, \ would probably be going to far." Bernstein (1986, 145-161) supports \ Brooks\' conclusion, and examines the layout of the inscriptions as \ further evidence for a dual identification. He also attempts to \ make a case for the existence of visual hints to the blinding of \ Harold on the basis of traditional iconography of blinding, and the \ legal overtones such a representation would carry for Anglo-Norman \ audiences, as well as the phallic significance of Harold\'s injury \ to the thigh. Lewis (1999, 128) views such a gesture \ of castration as providing an absolute closure to Harold\'s reign \ and to the claims of Harold\'s descendants upon Odo\'s \ recently gained lands.
\More convincing is Bernstein\'s examination of seventeen stitch \ holes near the head of the second Harold that would perfectly \ account for a previously stitched arrow (see Museum: Harold\'s Second \ Death?). Such a representation would concur with \ Wace\'s later account (Library: Wace (¶140)), most likely \ based on observation of the Tapestry, that before his death, Harold \ attempted to pull the arrow out of his eye, but only succeeded in \ breaking off the shaft. Bernstein also earlier (43) argues for the \ influence of the image of the death of a warrior by arrow in the \ English copy of the Utrecht Psalter. Wilson \ (1985, 194), while supporting the dual-depiction theory, disputes \ the legitimacy of the above-mentioned stitch holes. Wilson notes \ that as no eighteenth or nineteenth-century facsimiles show an \ awareness of such obvious marks (particularly Charles Stothard, who \ was an acute observer of stitch-holes and based much of his \ reconstructions upon them), they must be must be a \ nineteenth-century fabrication.
\Cowdrey (1997, 104) cites William of \ Malmesbury\'s account (Library: William of Malmesbury \ (¶16)) of the ignominy of one of Harold\'s killers, and \ believes that the mounted knight striking down the second Harold \ has his head "bowed to token his disgrace." Parisse \ (1983, 68) argues that "if we do not take into account the second \ character\'s horse (in between the two Harolds) we see a body which \ is collapsing in three movements," and reconstructs what the scene \ would look like if there was indeed no horse present. However, \ little recognition has been given to the visual composition of this \ scene as an aid to identifiying Harold. Critically speaking, \ stepping back from the images and viewing this final episode of the \ battle in its entirety provides some additional perspective. On the \ left, four figures, three standing and one fallen, are depicted. On \ the right, six figures, four standing and two fallen, are shown. A \ Norman horseman charging from the left and a single defending \ figure occupy the center of this scene. The overall effect of the \ composition is that a Norman knight has broken through the weaker \ part of the defensive line to reach this central figure. Notably, \ the third standing figure on the left, the one often believed to be \ Harold with an arrow in his eye, has a posture similar to those of \ the two spearmen in front of him, and appears to have originally \ been designed with a like function in mind. Though the inscription \ here does break around this figure\'s head, due consideration must \ be given to the probaility that the inscriptions were added \ slightly later around the existing images (see Glossary: \ Inscriptions), and that the length of the extended \ descriptive phrase centers over the figure being cut down by the \ horseman. The full composition of this scene, the evidence of the \ early engravings (see above), the ex post facto nature of \ the inscription, and the proleptic tendency of restorers and \ scholars to understand the Tapestry in terms of later traditions of \ Harold\'s death by arrow, all encourage the identification of the \ central figure cut down by the Norman knight as Harold. \ Barlow (2002, 112ff.) studies the \ traditions for both the reclaimation and burial of Harold\'s body, \ and the legends of his survival.
'; events["Harolds"]={"ref":"Harolds","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Harold in Normandy"}; events["Harolds"].html='Harold\'s Mission to Normandy
\The events of Harold\'s mission to Normandy and subsequent \ adventures accounts for almost a full third of the Tapestry (see \ panels \ 7-65). In panels 7-12, Harold sails to Normandy, \ but lands in Ponthieu and is captured by Count \ Guy (see panels 13-21). William negotiates \ Harold\'s release (see panels 22-32), brings the earl to \ Normandy (see panels 33-39) and then takes him on a \ military expedition to Brittany (see panels 40-54 and Glossary: William\'s \ Breton Campaign). Afterwards, the duke presents \ Harold with arms (see panel 55), and they travel to Bayeux, where Harold swears an oath of \ fealty (panel 59). Harold then returns to \ England (see panel 61) and reports to King Edward \ (see panels 64-65).
\Most Norman accounts carry some version of the visit, \ though all versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ suspiciously leave out any entry for 1066, making it a likely time \ for such a visit to happen. Harold\'s whereabouts can be accounted \ for in 1063, and Cowdrey (1997, 101, n.26) notes that \ Harold at the latest would have had to have returned from Normandy \ by the summer of 1065. Such a visit is generally believed to have \ happened, though Barlow (2002, 69-70) considers the \ event largely to be a fiction of Norman propaganda. Dodwell \ (1966, 554) writes that the
\part of the Tapestry concerned with \ Harold\'s embassy to Normandy is then by no means a simple chronicle \ of events. It is an explanation at various levels of Harold\'s \ obligations and indebtedness to William so that when Harold does \ accept the crown the full depths and breadths of his treachery can \ be gauged by the medieval spectator.
\There are several theories regarding the nature of \ Harold\'s journey to Normandy. Unfortunately, the Tapestry is \ frustratingly vague about the event it depicts -- though Harold\'s \ time in Normandy is a major part of the Tapestry, the precise \ nature of his trip cannot be definitively determined. Given the \ Norman perspective of the Tapestry, however, it is generally held \ that this section showcases Harold\'s early oath to William and \ therefore sets up the earl\'s assumption of the English throne as an \ illicit and even immoral act. However, many other factors may play \ a part in this portion of the Tapestry. Harold\'s mission actually \ begins in panel 1, with a meeting between King \ Edward and Harold, and Anglo-Saxon and Norman literary sources \ suggest the matter of this meeting. William of Jumièges \ (Library: \ Jumièges (¶1)) notes that Edward , \ who had no heirs, had previously sent Robert of \ Jumièges, archbishop of Canterbury, to Normandy to nominate \ Duke William as successor to the throne of England. Jumièges \ also states that at some later date Edward sent Harold to swear \ fealty to William in this matter. Campbell \ (1977, 263-64) considers the mission a sign that Edward was intent \ on bringing back his pro-Norman policies from the early 1050s. \ Similarly, William of Poitiers (Library: Poitiers (¶1)) records \ Harold\'s mission as a trip commanded by a dying king to reaffirm a \ previous promise. Poitiers also commends Edward\'s choice of the \ powerful Harold as a shrewd and politic choice designed to contain \ potential grumblings of others and elsewhere (Library: \ Poitiers (¶30)) notes that Edward sent Harold \ to Normandy after Archbishop Stigand, Earl Godwin, Earl \ Leofric of Mercia and Earl Siward of Northumbria all confirmed \ Edward\'s pledge to William by oath to do the same. Keats-Rohan (1991, 165), however, \ points out that Walter of Mantes, who was defeated and imprisoned \ by William when he conquered Maine in 1063, was also the nephew of \ King Edward, and therefore could be the reason for Harold\'s \ mission. Recently, however, Walker (1997, 50-51, 95-102) has \ advanced the thesis that Edward never explicitly promised the \ throne to William, but that a disgruntled Robert of Jumièges \ led William to believe such a statement after the former was exiled \ from England in 1052. Following this, Walker argues that Harold \ (and Edward) would have had no sense in 1064 that William had \ designs on the English throne until after Harold\'s visit. Walker \ also (92-93) notes that the Vita Edwardi makes reference to \ Harold\'s personal study of the princes of Gaul. The earliest \ English source on this matter, Eadmer of Canterbury\'s Novorum \ Historium (Library: Eadmer (¶2)) records that \ Harold asked leave of Edward to go to Normandy to secure the \ release of hostages of the Godwin family, and that though Edward \ did not approve, he did not wish to hinder him. Eadmer notes that \ Wulfnoth, a son of Godwin, and \ Hakon, Swein\'s son, were dispatched to \ Normandy under William as hostages as a condition of the Godwin\'s \ return in 1052.
\As the Tapestry gives few clues how it should be interpreted, \ scholars have differed over which account the textile represents. \ Fowke (1898, 26), Bertrand \ (1966, 77), Dodwell (1966, 554), Brown (1985, \ 16), Grape (1994, 55) and DeVries \ (1999, 150) all argue that it is highly probable that the textile \ functioned as Norman propaganda and therefore follows the \ Norman version of events. Loyn (1966, 7) and Morton and \ Muntz (1972, xli, n.3), developed by Walker \ (1997, 81-83), report that in 1056 Harold performed a similar duty \ for Edward when he undertook a diplomatic mission to Flanders and \ the Rhineland, an embassy that, in Loyn\'s words, was "presumably \ instrumental in arranging the return of Edward Atheling, the \ Confessor\'s nephew, from his exile in Hungary." Conversely, other \ scholars, such as Brooks (1978, 10-11), Bates (2001, \ 74-75) and Wissolik (1979, passim) maintain \ that this section of the Tapestry follows Eadmer\'s version of \ events and is more sympathetic to the English side of the story. \ Wissolik goes as far as to promote the operation of a "subversive \ code" which allows interpretations of the scene which oppose Norman \ accounts. In a more moderate vein, Campbell \ (1984, 132) decides that Harold may have had two motives, the \ confirmation of William as heir and the release of his \ relative/hostages. A third school, Freeman \ (1875, 689-90), Gibbs-Smith (1973, 11) and Wilson \ (1985, 197) follows the information of much later chronicles, such \ as William of Malmesbury, who suggests that Harold was simply out \ on a fishing expedition when a sudden storm blew his ship to the \ Continent (Library: \ Malmesbury (¶2)). Douglas \ (1953, 540-541) refutes this interpretation of the events, in part \ on the evidence in the Tapestry that Harold\'s ship (see panel 10) appears \ armed for war, not a fishing expedition. Wright \ (1996, 23) argues that Harold was on a private journey as his \ treatment by Guy implies that the earl was not covered by \ diplomatic immunity and therefore could not have been on a mission \ for King Edward . This argument, however, appears questionable in \ light of both Ponthieu\'s history of enmity towards William (see \ Glossary: \ Ponthieu) and reports of chroniclers about the \ region\'s disdain for the rights of people shipwrecked (cf. \ Library: William of \ Malmesbury (¦2)). Barlow \ (2002, 75) notes later Scandinavian sources record that Harold was \ actually on his way to Wales when he was blown off \ course.
\In any event, the Tapestry likely presents the Norman account of \ Harold\'s embarkation. The work was created to glorify Normans, not \ English, and would most likely follow the contemporary Norman \ chronicles. Though Gibbs-Smith comments that "to suppose . . . that \ Harold would intentionally put himself in the power of his only \ rival . . . would be naive in the extreme," Harold actually had \ extremely strong impetes for going to Normandy, and most likely \ went for a variety of political and personal reasons. Though \ Douglas (1953, 542) does note that all \ the non-Norman accounts of Harold\'s trip do share one thing in \ comman, that his presence in Normandy is involuntary, he later (see \ Douglas (1964, 176, n.1)) speculates \ that Harold may have gone on the mission despite his power as he \ not only desired to obtain the release of his hostage-relatives, \ but because he also "wished to safeguard his eventual position in \ the event of Duke William\'s success." The third view, which holds \ Harold was simply blown off course during a fishing trip, has no \ place in Tapestry criticism, as it renders the establishment of the \ opening scene, and the initial relationship of Harold and Edward, \ relatively pointless.
\Additionally, several scholars have raised the possibility that \ marriage plans for either Harold or William played a role in the \ earl\'s mission. Poitiers (see Chibnall \ (1998, 156-157)) notes a daughter of William had been betrothed to \ Harold, while Orderic Vitalis (Library: Orderic (¶1)) reports \ that Harold lies to King Edward about being betrothed to one of \ William\'s daughters (see below). Eadmer of Canterbury (Library: Eadmer \ (¶6)) details William\'s coercive offer to Harold that Harold \ provide a sister whom William could marry off to one of his nobles, \ while having the earl marry his own daughter. Rud (1996, 54-55) draws on \ Snorre\'s much later Scandinavian account and relates that during \ his stay with William, Harold stayed up late talking with the \ duke\'s wife, and eventually asked for William\'s daughter\'s hand in \ marriage. Morton \ and Muntz (1972, 70) raise the possibility that \ William and Harold had discussed a joint kingship, “so long \ as Harold set a Norman queen by his own side . . .arrangements to \ share the rule of England in this fashion had been common in \ preceding reigns." Finally, the undecipherable figure of \ Ælfgyva may likewise signify some of these marital designs \ (see panel 39 for a discussion of possible \ personae of betrothal that Ælfgyva could represent).
\Harold\'s return and second visit with Edward in panels 64-65 has \ also been scrutinized for clues to the nature of the earl\'s \ mission. Unfortunately, the accounts of Edward\'s reception of \ Harold vary. Eadmer ((Library: Eadmer (¶6)) records \ Edward\'s dissatisfaction with Harold upon his return as the king \ had warned the earl not to go to Normandy in the first place. \ Orderic Vitalis ( (Library: Orderic (¶1)) reports \ that upon his return, Harold lied to Edward about his exploits, and \ told the king that William had given him a daughter in marriage and \ also had granted him the claim to the English throne. Chibnall \ (1969, 136, n.1), however, regards this account as unreliable. \ Though William of Poitiers and William of Jumièges do not \ report Edward\'s attitude towards Harold upon his return, one would \ assume a favorable one from their accounts as Harold, according to \ their writings, had done Edward\'s bidding. A few scholars have \ argued that Harold\'s posture in panel 64 indicates Edward\'s \ dissatisfaction with the earl and read this scene as admonitory. \ Holmes (1957, 180) and Parisse \ (1983, 47) contend that here Harold looks "uneasy" and justifies \ himself in front of the king. Furthermore, Fowke (1898, \ 72) believes the figure with the axe signifies that Harold has \ committed an offense worthy of death. Freeman \ (1875, 687-88) views this scene as conflicting with the Norman \ account of events and corresponding more with Eadmer\'s, but does \ not consider the guard to be threatening Harold. Brooks \ (1978, 10-11) provides the most in-depth assessment of this episode \ and concludes that "the Tapestry is not here depicting the return \ of a man who has successfully accomplished the mission on which the \ king has sent him -- as the Norman versions would require." \ Wilson (1985, 198) likewise states that \ Edward might be admonishing Harold, and notes the earl\'s cringing \ posture. Cetto (1970, 14-15) reads more \ moderately and suggests that Edward is simply giving Harold \ instructions, or perhaps reminding Harold that William is his \ designated heir to the throne. Importantly, Harold\'s posture does \ not explicitly define itself. Subsequently, scholarly description \ plays an important role in fashioning this figure\'s reception. \ Brooks (11), for instance, describes Harold here as "astonishingly \ but deliberately contorted." However, analogous images from both \ the Continent and England suggest that Harold\'s posture could be \ one of respect and/or gratitude. If this was the case, no \ Anglo-Saxon subversion need be read. See Museum: Isaac blesses \ Jacob . If this was the case, no Anglo-Saxon \ subversion need be read. See also Michel \ (1949, plate 21), Swarzenski (1954, plate 70), Temple \ (1976, fig. 1, plate 194, plate 317) and Dodwell \ (1974, plate 43r) for examples of similar stances of reverence or \ thanks.
\Index: Harold\'s mission to Normandy, first meeting with \ King Edward, panel 1; sails to Normandy, panels 7-12; \ captured by Guy, panels 12-14; meets with Guy, freed by \ William, panels 22-32; meets with William, \ panels \ 37-39; accompanies William to Brittany, panels 40-54, \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign; bestowed arms by William, \ panel 55; \ swears oath to William, panel 59; returns to England, panel 61; reports \ to Edward, panels 64-65.
'; events["Oath"]={"ref":"Oath","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Harold's Oath"}; events["Oath"].html='Harold\'s Oath to William
\In panel 59, Harold stands between two \ reliquaries, his hands outstretched in order to touch both of \ them.
\The Tapestry is the only early work to locate the oath at \ Bayeux. William of Poitiers (Library: \ Poitiers (¶4)) places it at \ Bonneville-sur-Toques (where he was archdeacon), while Orderic \ Vitalis (Library: \ Orderic (¶1)) reports the event to have taken \ place at Rouen. Wace (Library: Wace (¶7)) also reports \ Bayeux as the site of the oath; Wace, however, possibly followed \ the Tapestry on this detail. Douglas (1964, 176-177) discusses all \ of these potential locations in regards to the historical context, \ and believes it unlikely that the oath actually took place in \ Bayeux. Cowdrey (1997, 94, n. 4) considers the \ inscriptions and details of panel 57 and finds it possible that the \ Tapestry is meant only to indicate that the oath took place near, \ and not in, Bayeux. Barlow (2002, 73-74), however, notes \ that Guernes of Pont-Sainte-Maxence\'s late twelfth-century life of \ St. Thomas Becket records the location of the oath as Bur-le-Roi, a \ ducal hunting lodge near Bayeux. Brooks \ (1978, 8) finds the situation of the oath at Bayeux logical, given \ that Odo was bishop of the city. Bates (2001, \ 75-76) believes that the locative confusion can be explained in \ terms of a treaty and oath at Bonneville, and then a religious \ ceremony at Bayeux. Lewis (1999, 98-99) argues that such \ placement of the oath is a calculated move to place Harold also \ within Odo\'s feudal sphere, as Odo will subsequently obtain \ Harold\'s lands in Wessex after the Conquest.
\Many scholars have argued that this scene is a pivotal and \ definitive episode in the story of the Tapestry. The fact that \ nearly every contemporary account of the events preceding the \ Norman invasion of England includes a version of it attests to its \ importance. The Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (Library: \ Carmen (¶13)) thrice makes reference to \ Harold\'s sacred oaths to William. William of Jumièges \ (Library: \ Jumièges (¶2)) records that Edward sent \ Harold to swear fealty to William in the matter of William\'s \ succession to the English throne and that during his stay with the \ duke, the English earl swore fealty to him "with many oaths." Both \ Eadmer of Canterbury and William of Poitiers place this ceremony \ before William\'s Breton campaign, but differ in their \ reasons for the oath. Eadmer of Canterbury (Library: Eadmer \ (¶6)) reports the numerous terms and conditions to which \ Harold swore, but continues that Harold only so swore in order to \ gain the release of Anglo-Saxon hostages and because his life was \ in danger (cf. Glossary: Harold\'s Mission to \ Normandy). Poitiers gives a long and improbable list \ of conditions to which Harold agreed, but implies that Harold\'s \ enfeoffment was a voluntary one. Following Poitiers\' account, \ Orderic Vitalis writes that Harold made an oath to William in the \ presence of nobles but that the Breton campaign and arms-giving \ happened after the oath. Finally, the Vita Ædwardi \ (see Barlow (1992, 80)) might make an \ indirect reference to this ceremony when it mentions that Harold \ has a reputation for being too generous with oaths (sed ille \ citius ad sacramenta nimis ). See Douglas \ (1953, 540- 545) for the argument that Norman historical sources \ should be privileged over non-Norman when interpreting the nature \ of Harold\'s oath.
\Both Stenton (1957, 15) and Wormald \ (1957, 34) view the oath scene as the centerpiece of the Tapestry. \ Stenton believes the oath to be the "climax of the story" and "the \ turning-point of the whole action displayed on the Tapestry," while \ Wormald explains that all of Harold\'s previous prominence in the \ Tapestry serves to emphasize his subsequent fall as a result of \ swearing falsely on relics. Wormald, like McNulty \ (1989, 73), also suggests that the Tapestry specifically attaches a \ thematic importance to the sacred relics of Bayeux, an importance \ which in turn "emphasizes and foreshadows Harold\'s perjury." \ Werckmeister (1976, 563-579) studies \ the scene in depth, and concludes that the ceremony represented \ emphasizes a tie that is legal, but not feudal, and perhaps at the \ expense of a feudal obligation. Werckmeister further argues that \ the scene could represent an oath of royal authority which, in the \ hindsight of the Tapestry, would better fit the context of Harold\'s \ cross-cultural relationship with William. Lewis (1999, \ 102) views this scene as the moment Harold\'s loyalties become \ conflicted between Edward and William. Cowdrey \ (1997, 97-98) argues that the oath-taking scene is deliberately \ emphasized by being placed last among the events which take place \ on the Continent. Lewis (103-104) maintains that the chronological \ displacement of this episode, coupled with the juxtaposition of \ this scene with Harold\'s Channel crossing, locates the earl "on \ liminal ground, caught in a moment of crucial \ indeterminacy."
\Shirley Ann Brown (1977, 98) denies the need to \ find historical accuracy in this event, as it was simply "used as a \ vehicle for demonstrating Harold\'s heroism and his alliance with \ William," while Morton (1972, 70) notes that Harold\'s \ oath might have carried connotations of an alliance or joint \ rulership. Conversely, R.Allen Brown (1984, 40) contends that feudal \ culture was already prevalent in Continental cultures and that the \ implications of this scene were plainly feudal. Brown also finds \ that William previously practiced a similar feudal strategy in "the \ homage taken from Herbert count of Maine between 1058 and 1060 \ which led to the occupation of that country in 1063."
\Another school of thought follows Eadmer\'s account and \ maintains that Harold was either tricked or coerced into swearing \ to William. Thorpe (1973, 10) devalues the \ integrity of the oath, arguing that despite the appearance of \ Harold as an honored guest, he was in reality a prisoner of the \ duke. Bernstein (1986, 116-117) implies as \ much by pointing out the closeness of the oath-taking scene to \ Harold\'s safe departure from Normandy. Walker \ (1997, 99) develops the idea that Harold\'s position could here \ quickly switch from guest to prisoner, and notes now the special \ irony of William\'s "rescue" from Count Guy, given that King \ Edward\'s nephew, Walter of Mantes, had recently died while a \ prisoner of William. Freeman (1875, 697- 98) reviews and \ discounts later historical accounts that Harold was unaware of the \ relics and was tricked into his oath on sacred relics. Gibbs-Smith (1973, 11) asserts that the \ oath scene affirms that Harold was indeed a prisoner, and not a \ diplomatic emissary. To Gibbs-Smith, requiring an oath is the last \ thing William would have done if Harold was an emissary, as "such \ oath-demanding could only be the behavior of an unfriendly ruler \ into whose hands fate had thrown his rival." The oath, he argues, \ was less risky to William than killing Harold outright. The \ Carmen (¶13) records that \ Harold swore his oaths secretly, and some discussion has arisen as \ to whether the oath-scene in the Tapestry was covert. Werckmeister (1976, 564) and \ Brown (1977, 55-56) both \ note the absence of a clerical witness to the proceedings, and \ Werckmeister further considers the fact that no sources agree upon \ the location of the oath (see above) as evidence that the ceremony \ was a secret one. However, more recently Brown (1985, \ 20) has found the Tapestry\'s depiction of this ceremony formal and \ not private, while Wilson (1985, 180) has called attention \ to the open ground upon which Harold stands. This earth, Wilson \ contends, suggests an out-of-doors and therefore public ceremony. \ Lewis (1999, 37) argues that the \ scene\'s ambiguity demands that the viewer supply the content of the \ oath, and thus foregrounds the problem of divergent response to the \ complexities of the political and social conflict represented. The \ oath-swearing may also be considered a sacred companion to the \ secular giving-of-arms episode in panel 55.
\For a discussion of specific details of the Tapestry\'s \ representation of Harold\'s oath, see panel 59.
'; events["Shipbild"]={"ref":"Shipbild","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Ship Building"}; events["Shipbild"].html='Norman Shipbuilding
\Note: For ease of consultation to the Tapestry, this \ discussion is reproduced in the commentary for panel 81 and other \ relevant panels.
\In the Tapestry, panels 81 - 86 depict the Norman effort \ to build and/or augment their invasion fleet. Orderic Vitalis \ (Library: \ Orderic (¶7)) records that ships were speedily \ built because both clergy and laity devoted their time and money to \ the endeavor. Wilson (1985, 226) believes that this \ process reflects the Scandinavian leiflangr, "an obligation \ laid by a king on his coastal province to build ships and provide \ armed men for offensive expeditions and for defense at home," a \ system that Stenton (1971, 431) \ reports operated in England under Edward and well into the twelfth \ century. Though Brown (1977, 68) notes that the \ representation of shipbuilding "indicates that the ships had to be \ built from scratch," Gillmor (1996, 118ff.) takes issue with \ such claims and studies in detail the implications of building a \ navy in the eleventh century. Gillmor first considers evidence that \ the ships of William\'s fleet considerably varied in design and \ size, and the idea that shipwrights from all over Europe were \ called to build them. She next argues that the entire fleet could \ not have been constructed for the sole purpose of the crossing as, \ based on her estimates, it would have required between 40-50,000 \ trees to construct a fleet of 700 ships. Normandy alone could not \ at any single time support the proper number of large trees to \ support such an endeavor, and, according to Gillmor, "to argue this \ position implies that William was willing to convert Normandy to an \ economic wasteland." Furthermore, she calculates that it would have \ taken about 8,400 workmen to build a fleet of some 700 ships in \ three months, and that the logistics of feeding them would have \ been nearly impossible. The building of ships, she concluded, was a \ "last resort" and performed only after as many vessels as possible \ had been requisitioned from vassals or hired from mercenaries (see \ also Glossary: Ships).
\Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169) and Grape (1994, \ 129) consider Dives-sur-Mer, a traditional \ boat-building center in the eleventh century near Caen, a possible \ location for shipbuilding. Wilson (1985, 184) provides a concise \ description of the process depicted in panels 81 - 83:
\First the trees are felled with long-hafted \ symmetrical, straight-bladed felling axes. A haft of up to a metre \ in length is ideal for such a purpose . . . It would also seem that \ the branches were trimmed before the tree was felled . . . The \ planks were presumably split with wedges and then smoothed and \ shaped (as here) with T-shaped side axes of a type well-known at \ this period, which may have been in some cases asymmetrical. The \ broad blade allows a long shaving to be taken from the \ plank.
\Gillmor (1996, 128) points out that \ traditionally stockpiled supplies of seasoned wood for shipbuilding \ must have been exhausted if the shipbuilders were felling green \ timber. Werckmeister (1976, 539) suggests a \ comparison between this scene and scene XV from the Roman triumphal \ column of Trajan, one of nine scenes on the column where workmen \ fell trees. Mann (1957, 66) draws a distinction \ between the "T-headed" axes of the shipwrights in panel 84 and the \ "felling" axes of the workmen making the boats in panels 81 - 82.
\In panel 84, the workmen perform a variety \ of tasks, including: the boring of the oar-ports with what Wilson \ (1985, 184) describes as a breast-auger with a spoon bit, planing \ the wood with what Gibbs-Smith (1973, Plate 40) regards as \ an adze, but Mann (1957, 66) and Wilson (184) argue \ is instead a T-shaped side axe, and nailing together the hulls. \ Grape (1994, 128) interprets another \ figure as a supervisor of some kind, while Rud (1996, 61) \ identifies him as a bowwright, who is "sighting to see whether the \ planks are in proper alignment." See the commentary for \ panel 84 \ for more details.
\In panel 86, a final group of workers \ pulls the completed ships into the water by means of "painters" or \ mooring ropes. One figure looks back on the group and works with a \ rope that has been looped around a post planted in the water. \ Grape (1994, 28) emphasizes the \ accuracy with which the process of launching is depicted. The post \ is fitted with rings through which ropes are passed and then put \ around the stern post of the beached ship. According to Grape, this \ method "halves the force required, with minimal loss through \ friction and eliminates the risk of injury to shipwrights." \ Additionally, Fowke (1898, 94) believes that a pulley \ was built into the off-shore post, while Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169) notes that such \ a post must be placed quite a distance off-shore to be useful.
'; events["Stamford"]={"ref":"Stamford","html":"", "gif":"0", "caption":"Stamford Bridge"}; events["Stamford"].html='The Battle of Stamford Bridge
\Though the Battle of Stamford Bridge is not depicted in \ the Bayeux Tapestry, its occurrence directly influenced the outcome \ of the Battle of Hastings and by relation the Norman \ Conquest.
\In 1065, the earldom of Northumbria revolted against their \ earl, Tostig Godwinson, the brother of Harold. As a result, King \ Edward replaced Tostig as earl with Morcar, and expelled him from \ England, an action that Harold Godwinson chose to condone. After \ Edward\'s death and Harold\'s ascent to the throne, Tostig appealed \ first to Flanders, and possibly (but doubtfully) to Normandy, then \ to Sweden and Norway and possibly Scotland in search of military \ support to regain his position in England. King Harald Hardrada, \ who had a semblance of a claim to the English throne (see Glossary: Claims to \ the English Throne) agreed to back Tostig with a \ full-sized invasion force.
\While Harald prepared his fleet during the summer of 1066, \ Tostig returned to Flanders, and then attacked and plundered \ several areas on England\'s southern coast, perhaps to draw his \ brother Harold\'s attention away from the north of England. In \ response, Harold levied troops in the south, and then maintained \ them throughout the summer to guard against a possible Norman \ invasion. Tostig then sailed up England\'s east coast and landed at \ Lindsey to continue his raiding and perhaps to attempt to augment \ his fighting force. There however, he was defeated in battle by his \ replacement, Morcar, and his brother Edwin, the earl of Mercia. \ Tostig lost much of his force here; at this point his fleet had \ swelled to sixty ships, but afterwards he was only able to bring \ twelve ships of men to his rendezvous with Harald \ Hardrada.
\Late in the summer, Tostig, who possibly had gone to see \ King Malcom of Scotland after his defeat in Lindsey, met up with \ Harald Hardrada\'s forces at a pre-arranged landing spot on the \ Northumbrian coast. Harald, Tostig, and a part of this force \ landed, conquering and pillaging its way south to the Humber river, \ where it rejoined the Norwegian fleet. The full force (in the \ vincinity of 11,000 troops and 250 ships) then sailed up the Humber \ and then Ouse river, and made camp at Ricall, about ten miles south \ of the city of York. Shortly thereafter, on September 20, the \ considerably smaller forces of earls Edwin and Morcar met the \ invasion forces at Fulford Gate, about two miles south of York, and \ were soundly defeated. York subsequently submitted to Harald and \ Tostig, and arrangements were made to formalize the surrender with \ the exchange of hostages on September 25 at Stamford Bridge, to the \ northeast of York.
\In the meantime, however, King Harold had received word of \ the northern invasion, sometime between September 8-15, and made \ hasty preparations to respond. Harold had just been forced to \ release his land and naval forces because of a lack of provisions \ and the onset of the harvest season. Harold remustered his forces \ and marched 200 miles north to York in a little over a week, an \ incredible feat of military logistics. Harold arrived in Tadcaster, \ about seven miles southwest of York on the evening of September 24, \ in time to plan to surprise Harald and Tostig\'s forces in Stamford \ Bridge the following morning.
\The surprise must have been complete, as Harald and Tostig \ had chosen to leave parts of their force behind at Ricall to guard \ their fleet. Not imagining that Harold\'s English army could be \ anywhere near them, they also may have left behind their armor. \ Though the battle probably went on for most of the day, Harold\'s \ victory was total, and both Harald Hardrada and Tostig died in the \ battle.
\Though Harold was victorious, the contribution of Stamford \ Bridge to William the Conqueror\'s subsequent success cannot be \ overestimated. Three days after the battle, William\'s forces landed \ at Pevensey (see panel 102) and \ Harold was forced to march his army back down to London and prepare \ to do battle with the Norman invaders. The Norwegian invasion had \ also insured that the northern forces under earls Edwin and Morcar \ would be scattered and incapable of immediate assistance to Harold. \ In short, the victorious king was left two weeks later with an \ exhausted and wounded army, possibly now sick of bloodshed, to face \ the relatively fresh Norman forces at the Battle of Hastings on \ October 14.
\See DeVries (1999, 230-299) for the most \ comprehensive discussion of Harald and Tostig\'s invasion. See also \ Freeman \ (1875, 353-377) and Walker (1997, \ 152-165).
\For literary accounts of this battle, see, among others, \ Library: Anglo-Saxon \ Chronicle (¶3), Library: Henry of Huntingdon \ (¶3), and Library: William of Malmesbury \ (¶4).
'; var details = new Array (); details["Architec"]={"ref":"Architec","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Architecture"}; details["Architec"].html='Architecture
\As Brown (1965, 76) has noted, "the Bayeux \ Tapestry shows, with whatever accuracy, almost every type of \ building of its period, churches both great and small, civil \ residences and dwellings from the palaces of kings and dukes to the \ cottages of peasants, and castles, at least of the motte-and-bailey \ type, then most common in Normandy and soon to be innumerable in \ England."
\While it is generally agreed that a broad range of \ structures (34 in all) are shown in the Tapestry, the exact nature \ of most of these representations remains in dispute. Brown (84) and \ Holmes (1959, 180ff.) argue that while \ the buildings of the Tapestry serve as narrative markers, they are \ also depicted as they existed in real life. Conversely, Mann (1974, \ 59-65), Wilson (1985, 214-216), and Grape (1994, \ 27) contend that, with the possible exceptions of Mont Saint Michel \ in panel \ 43 and Westminster Abbey in panels 66 - 67, the architectural \ representations in the Tapestry are highly conventional, with \ little or no basis in realistic detail. Mann (closely followed by \ Hart \ (2000, 133 and fig. 7)) in particular argues (albeit somewhat more \ tenuously) for the influence of the manuscripts of the Utrecht and \ Harley Psalters, MS Cotton Claudius Biv and MS Junius 11, in the \ depictions of the buildings of the Tapestry. For specific \ discussions of individual structures, see the appropriate \ commentary. For a general discussion of the buildings in the \ Tapestry, see Brown (1965); Harfield \ (1996) contains a recent and perhaps the most comprehensive survey \ of scholarly treatments of most buildings in the textile. In \ particular, in his discussion of fortifications in the Tapestry, \ Harfield references a number of scholarly sources which reference \ the textile in support of more general architectural and \ archaeological arguments. Harfield, following Gem (1981, \ 37), closes his architectural survey with the \ recommendation:
\Most of the information derived from the \ Tapestry . . . is merely confirmation of what is known from other \ sources; and any details which cannot be verified should be treated \ with reserve.
\Index: architecture,
\
Panel 1 - \
Westminster or Winchester Hall;
\
Panel 4 - \
A church at Bosham;
\
Panels 5 - \
6 - A hall at Bosham;
\
Panels 20 \
- 21 - A hall at Beaurain;
\
Panel 25 \
- A pavilion or loge in Normandy;
\
Panel 28 \
- A stone fortification at Rouen or Beaurain;
\
Panel 36 \
- A tower at Rouen;
\
Panels 37 \
- 38 - A hall at Rouen;
\
Panel 40 \
- A tower at Rouen;
\
Panel 43 \
- Mont St. Michel;
\
Panel 47 \
- A motte-and-bailey at Dol;
\
Panel 49 \
- A motte-and-bailey at Rennes;
\
Panel 52 \
- A motte-and-bailey at Dinan;
\
Panel 57 \
- A motte-and-bailey or fortified town at Bayeux;
\
Panel 62 \
- A house with balcony or wharf on the English coast;
\
Panel 64 \
- A gate or tower in London;
\
Panel 65 \
- A hall in Westminster;
\
Panels 66 \
- 67 - Westminster Abbey;
\
Panel 70 \
- A split-story hall in Westminster;
\
Panels 72 \
- 73 - A coronation hall in Westminster;
\
Panel 75 \
- A hall, probably in Westminster;
\
Panel 80 \
- A hall, probably in Rouen or Bonneville-sur-Toques;
\
Panel 87 \
- A pavilion or loge in Dives-sur-Mer;
\
Panels \
106 - 8 - A series of small wooden huts near Pevensey or \
Hastings;
\
Panel \
111 - A gateway or tower in Hastings;
\
Panel \
113 - A roofed structure at Hastings;
\
Panel \
116 - A motte-and-bailey at Hastings;
\
Panel \
118 - A two-story house near Hastings;
\
Panel \
119 - A building, tower, and gate at Hastings.
Armor in the Bayeux Tapestry
\For overviews of Norman and Anglo-Saxon armor used at \ Hastings, see Mann (1957, 58-64), Peirce \ (1988), and Wright (1996, 60-72)
\Helmets:
\
Mann \
(1957, 58-60), followed closely by Peirce \
(1988, 240-244), provides a full discussion of the types of helms \
found in the Tapestry. He first surveys analogous helmets, \
including one which was discovered in a wood near Olmütz in \
Moravia, and the helmet of St. Wenceslas, preserved in the \
Cathedral church of St. Vitus at Prague. Mann identifies a few of \
the helms of the Tapestry as a variants of the spangenhelm, \
"a round or conical head piece divided into sections by broad \
applied bands, usually four, springing from the lower edge and \
meeting at the apex, with a fifth round the lower rim" (e.g. \
panel \
55). Most, however, show that "the nasal and the band encircling \
the lower rim were made together of one piece and applied to the \
helmet." Furthermore, Mann argues that the frequent appearance of a \
vertical line from apex to rim in views of helmets in profile \
suggests that there may have been bands or joins, and that not \
every helmet was beaten out of one piece of metal. Based on their \
representation in the Tapestry, Peirce (241-242) believes that \
these helms were made of one piece, and additionally finds evidence \
of rigid neck-guards in the representation of some helmets in the \
Tapestry (e.g. panel 88). Bruce (1856, \
96) notes the existence of two nasaled helmets similar to those \
represented in the Tapestry, one discovered in Cheltenham and one \
in Derbyshire.
Index: helmets, panel 41, \ panel 46, \ panels 48 \ - 56, panel 122ff.; carried, panels 87 - 88, \ stockpiled on wagon, panel 89; decorative finial of Odo\'s, \ panel \ 158; William raises his, panel 160.
\Mail Armor:
\
The Tapestry displays some 200 suits of Norman hauberks and \
Anglo-Saxon byrnies. Peirce (1988, 237) counts in excess of \
130 mailed warriors in the central narrative. Peirce provides \
substantial background to the nature of eleventh-century armor, \
while Mann (1957, 60-63) contains the most \
comprehensive study of the nature of armor in the Tapestry. In his \
survey of the two armies\' suits of mail, Mann concludes that they \
are represented similarly in the Tapestry:
We may therefore assume that all the dozens \ of mail shirts shown worn by horsemen and footmen in the Bayeux \ Tapestry are composed of interlinked, riveted rings forming a \ flexible armour, easy to wear in action, good for stopping a cut or \ thrust, but heavy and not effective against contusion without the \ supplement of a padded undergarment. (60)
\Mann also discounts the idea of rings sewn on to \ padded leather underneath and cites the scavengers in panels 167 - 170 \ as proof that the garment was all of one piece, and of the same \ appearance inside and out. Gibbs-Smith (1957, 171) notes that the \ mail coif appears on some figures in the Tapestry, and that its \ absence elsewhere may connote that it was detachable. Additionally, \ Mann notes that as with some Anglo-Saxon illuminations, some mail \ shirts in the Tapestry reveal a small slit in the left side that \ internally sheaths the sword. Mann regards the mail on the legs of \ the more notable figures as "gaiters laced behind the calf," not \ mail stockings, and points to similar representations in the \ Winchester Bible. In his discussions of the mail vestments, \ Brooks (1978, 19-21) argues that the \ Tapestry displays mailed trousers. Brooks bases his thesis on the \ idea that as Anglo-Saxons primarily fought on foot, they needed \ protection on the inner leg and groin areas. Conversely, Mann (63) \ contends that the mail shirts in the Tapestry all have short, wide \ sleeves, leaving the forearms free, and that the skirts are divided \ in front and behind, a depiction which gives the appearance \ of trousers. Mann discounts the possibility of actual trousers \ because it would of course be impossible to ride in mail trousers \ without great discomfort to the fork. Gibbs-Smith (1973, 7-8), Wilson \ (1985, 221), Peirce (1988, 238), and Grape (1994, \ 25) also maintain that the mail suits consist of split-skirts, not \ trousers. Wilson (1985, 221) compares depictions \ of the armor here to those on the Franks Casket and in British Lib. \ MS Cotton Claudius Biv. Brooks (1978, 3) also charts the \ changing forms of mail armor depicted in the Tapestry and views \ this as evidence that the workshop was experimenting and learning \ as it proceeded before finally settling on the single formula of \ circle-rings in embroidering the armor. Bates (2001, \ 93) points out that a few, presumably very prominent, men have \ chain mail which covers the entire leg (e.g. William in \ panel \ 160).
\Frequent to the Tapestry, but rare elsewhere, is a \ square ornamentation featured on some suits of mail. See panel 41 and \ Museum: Armor \ Ornaments for details. Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169) assesses the \ weight of a hauberk as only about 25-30 pounds, and about 45-50 \ pounds with sword and shield; for comparison he notes that a \ soldier in World War II carried about 55 pounds into \ action.
\Index: mail armor, panel 41, \ panels 48 \ - 56, panels 104 - 105, panel 120, \ panels \ 122ff.; with square ornamentation, panel 41, panels 55 - 56, \ panels \ 122 - 124, panels 127 - 129, panel 161, \ Museum: Armor \ Ornaments ; coifs, panel 105, panel 107, \ panel \ 130, panel 135, panel 147, \ panel \ 156, panel 159; loaded for invasion, \ panels 88 \ - 89; stripping from wounded, panels 167 - 169, panels 171 - \ 172.
\Shields:
\
The shields shown in the Tapestry are mostly of two types: \
kite-shaped shields with rounded tops, which are in the majority, \
and nine Anglo-Saxon "old-fashioned" circular shields with central \
bosses (e.g. panel 151). Though many designs adorn \
the kite-shaped shields, no heraldic devices are explicitly shown, \
and the shield-insignia of the dragon seems to be used \
interchangeably with both Norman and English troops. Parisse \
(1983, 87) discusses the construction of these shields, and states \
that they would have been made of "cuir bouilli stretched on a \
wooden convex frame" of an oblong shape of "1.20 meters or 48 \
inches." Troops attached their shields to the neck by "a long thin \
strip known as a guige" and used enarmes, or handles \
attached to the inside of the shield to carry this protection \
(e.g. panel 45). Mann (1957, \
64), followed closely by Peirce (1988, 244), reports that no \
round-topped, kite-shaped shield of the kind shown in the Tapestry \
is known still to exist. Consequently, he surmises that these \
shields were constructed of non-durable material such as wood and \
leather, and notes that the arrows sticking in the shields in the \
later battle scenes of the work support such a thesis. Furthermore, \
Mann considers the colored rims which mark many of the shields in \
the Tapestry to be wooden, as no metal rims have been found, though \
he expects that these rims would have been made of metal. Wilson \
(1985, 223) states that while no contemporary English source \
displays this type of kite-shield, many Continental sources do, and \
that the Tapestry reflects an actual change in the military \
fashion of cavalry shields from round to kite. Wright \
(1996, 72) believes that the Tapestry depicts a third type of oval \
shield, which is transitional between the circular and kite forms. \
Harfield (1996, 171-172) observes that \
without the Tapestry and "one or two contemporary manuscripts," no \
record of the use of kite shields in the eleventh century would \
exist. Harfield also surveys shield ornamentation in the Tapestry, \
reckoning that of some 237 shields shown, 72 have external \
decoration: "seven have an animal or abstract design, 22 have \
irregular crosses[, and] 43 have small circles best interpreted as \
metal studs securing the straps by which the shields are held." \
Harfield further, however, dismisses any notions that such \
ornamentation may have been heraldic. For discussions of the \
purpose and storing of shields on ships, see Glossary: \
Ships.
Index: shields, kite, panel 15, \ panels 26 \ - 27, panel 33, panel 38, \ panels 40 \ - 54, panel 56, panel 58, \ panel 91, \ panels \ 104 - 105, panel 107, panel 122ff.; \ shields, round (Anglo-Saxon), panel 149 (border), panel 151, \ panel \ 153, panel 165, panel 168, \ panel \ 170, panel 171 (border), panels 44 - 46, \ panel \ 163; on ships gunwales, panels 9 - 11, panel 61, \ panels 92 \ - 99; as tabletop at outdoor feast, panel 112; scavengers haggle over, \ panel \ 169 (border).
'; details["Banners"]={"ref":"Banners","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Banners"}; details["Banners"].html='Banners and Pennants
\Banners, pennants or gonfanons attached to lances appear \ some 30 times in the Tapestry. Additionally, the ship in panel 77 and four \ or five ships in the Norman fleet (see panels 93 - 99) \ fly pennants from the mast. Bruce (1856, 102) posits that these \ materials may represent “the ribbons given to the Norman \ lords, as keepsakes by their ladies.” More recently, scholars \ such as Mann (1957, 67) and Renn (1993, \ 187) have identified them as marks of military authority and/or \ distinguishing the leader of a conroi or fighting unit. \ Similarly, Hart (2000, 141-144), who includes a \ brief review of the origin of gonfanons, believes that banners \ displayed on spears or lances in the Tapestry are mostly Norman, \ and "were clearly intended as an indication of authority." Renn \ (189) reports that 17 of the gonfanons have a "border around all \ four sides of the field [bordered], and thirteen which are simply \ rolled up so it is uncertain whether they have a border or not \ [simple]." Gibbs-Smith (1973, 7), among others, \ observes that the gonfanon was probably derived from the \ danborg, the Norse war-flag or raven-flag. Mann (1957, \ 69, n. 21) observes that similar banners are illuminated in the \ Winchester Bible and Bibliothèque Publique, Evreux MS 131, \ f. 1 (initial letter B). French (1857, 133ff.) studies the \ occurrences of triple-points and dots in the banners and suggests a \ symbolic system which communicates the doctrine of the Holy \ Trinity.
\Mann (1957, 67), among others, has \ followed William of Poitiers\' account (Library: \ Poitiers (¶35)) concerning William\'s use of \ Pope Alexander\'s papal banner in the Battle of Hastings and has \ attempted to identify said banner in the Tapestry. However, \ Brown (1977, 113) comments that there \ is no evidence for what the papal banner actually looked like and \ that "it is only assumed that it would bear a cross design," and \ later (144) argues that post-Conquest tensions between William and \ Pope Gregory over issues of fealty would have made the depiction of \ the papal banner a delicate issue. Erdmann \ (1977, 197-200) doubts that the papal banner of Pope Alexander is \ shown anywhere in the Bayeux Tapestry, as the cross banners shown \ are not of a uniform look. Gibbs-Smith (1973, 13) dismisses the \ idea that the papal banner could be flown from William\'s ship on \ the basis that it would never be exposed to the elements in that \ fashion. In a similar vein, Harfield (1996, 171-72) doubts notions \ that the banners might display personal and consistent heraldic \ devices. For early studies of the banners of the Tapestry, see \ French \ (1857, 133ff.). For more recent surveys, see Barraclough (1969, 117-128) and \ Renn \ (1993, 187-198). For discussions of specific banners, see the \ commentary from the relevant panels.
\Index: banners, Norman, panel 41, \ panel 48, \ panels 52 \ - 54, panel 55, panel 92, \ panels \ 104 - 105, panel 114, panels 116 - \ 117, panel 120, panels 124 - \ 125, panel 129, panels 134 - \ 140; Eustace\'s, panel 161; English, panel 144, \ panel \ 146, panel 167 (fallen), panel 168; ship \ pennants, panel 77, panels 93 - 94, \ panels 98 \ - 99.
'; details["Borders"]={"ref":"Borders","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Borders"}; details["Borders"].html='Borders
\Though the animals and persons that decorate the upper and \ lower borders of the Bayeux Tapestry are often considered only \ decorative and therefore marginal to the central narrative, they \ still have generated a considerable amount of scholarship. For \ treatments of individual border figures, see the commentary for the \ appropriate panel.
\Hicks (1992, 251ff.) views the border \ ornamentation as something which "contributes to our knowledge of \ the sources of Romanesque art." She reports that approximately 530 \ creatures, including 173 birds and 140 lions, are depicted in the \ borders and divides the figures shown into two classes, ornamental \ and narratal (for a discussion of the fables shown in the borders, \ see Glossary: Fables). Parisse \ (1983, 124) counts 208 pairs of decorative animals in the margins. \ Based on her theory of the Tapestry\'s manufacture (cf. \ Introduction: \ Manufacture & Length ), Koslin \ (1990, 41-42) finds a different hand behind the borders, and argues \ that they must have been embroidered after the central narrative. \ According to border commentators such as Hicks, Wormald \ (1957, 26-27), Brown (1966, 112), Dodwell \ (1982, 169), Yapp (1987, 33), Bernstein (1986, 87-88), and Grape (1994, \ 42-43), the animals in the margins display influences from sources \ as diverse as Iranian and Byzantine silks, Western European \ mosaics, Insular manuscript illuminations, and observations of \ contemporary life. Caviness (1998, 167-68) traces the \ eighteenth- and nineteenth-century reception of the "indecencies" \ in the borders.
\There has, however, been a degree of disagreement as to \ the precise relation of the borders to the art and events of the \ central narrative. Following arguments made as early as 1767 (see \ Lethieullier (1767, 4)), Gibbs-Smith (1957, 165) and Grape (1994, \ 42-43) deny the border any strong semantic significance in relation \ to the main narrative. Grape in particular has argued that the \ borders operate in a tradition of the decorative catalogue, to \ which no "deep" meaning may be ascribed. Cholakian (1997, 47) cautions that \ "before connecting border ornamentation and events in the main \ register, critics should have very compelling reasons to do so." \ Other scholars have argued for various points of narrative relation \ to the main of the Tapestry. Wormald (1957, 26-27) views the margins \ as a means “whereby space can be suggested” by the \ definition and breaking of boundaries. He also terms the episodes \ of contemporary agrarian activity found in early sections of the \ lower border "genre scenes." Dodwell (1966, 559) \ contends that "some scenes of the borders are clearly associated \ with the main narrative and are meant to be \'read\' in conjunction \ with it." Edwards (1975, 22-23) suggests that the \ borders "contain, unite, and stabilise" the central story, while \ the figures\' "very smallness tricks our eye into believing that the \ figures taking part in the narrative are larger than is actually \ the case." It is obvious, however, that from the moment when the \ Battle of Hastings is joined in panel 144, the lower border assumes a \ direct connection with the warfare above it as it shows casualties, \ support fire, discarded equipment, and scavengers. MacCornack (1985, 102) considers the \ beasts of the borders "all evil and at war with one another, just \ like the main characters are either treasonous or at \ war."
\Some scholars have proposed various systematic approaches \ to the meaning of the margins. Villion \ (1966, 14) views the upper border as an area which is concerned \ with psychology and spirituality, and related to the sky and \ heaven, and regards the lower border as related to the earth, man\'s \ failings, and nature. Bernstein (1986, 70, 82-88) and \ McNulty (1989, vii and passim) \ argue that the borders gloss the Tapestry and, in McNulty\'s words, \ "provide interpretation and commentary on the main matter." \ Terkla (1995, passim) expands \ McNulty\'s ideas and argues for "a systematic reading scheme" to \ relate the meaning of the borders to the meaning of the central \ narrative (265). Specifically, Terkla examines the diagonals and \ fables of the borders to demonstrate the "Norman bias" of the \ Tapestry. Swanton (1995, 157-159) judiciously \ cautions against such "over-readings." Brilliant (1997, 134) suggests that the \ diagonals of the borders appear as cantillation signs designed to \ notate a distinctive rhythm to the passage, perhaps as an aid to \ oral performance. Brilliant (135) also states that the \ interruptions of the borders by the "vertical extensions" of the \ central narrative mark "narrative asides" in the struggle for the \ English throne.
'; details["Costumes"]={"ref":"Costumes","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Costumes and Dress"}; details["Costumes"].html='Costumes and Dress
\For discussions of individual items of costume or dress, \ see the commentary for the panel which contains these \ items.
\Though several commentaries on the Tapestry contain brief \ discussions on the clothing depicted in the Tapestry, almost all \ derive from John Nevinson\'s 1957 monograph (see Nevinson \ (1957, 70-76)). Nevinson (70) reports that as few literary \ discussions or other sources for the dress of Saxons and Normans \ exist, “any conclusions on Saxon and Norman dress must \ therefore be based on the Tapestry itself and on comparisons \ between it and drawings in manuscripts of about the same \ date.” Owen-Crocker (1990, passim) \ contains a more recent discussion of costume, particularly skirts, \ trousers, and tunics, in relation to the process of the Tapestry\'s \ manufacture and analogous Scandinavian textiles; in a later essay \ (Owen-Crocker (1998, 31-35)), she \ examines possible representations of leather clothing in the \ textile.
\In his discussion, Nevinson (72) points out that \ "individual garments, with a few exceptions . . . were not \ parti-coloured," and that "the embroidery gives occasional hints of \ material and pattern, while fringes, border ornaments, and \ fastenings are often indicated.” He also regards the \ three-quarter length mantle, fastened with a brooch, as the most \ obvious sign of rank in the Tapestry (e.g. panel 3). Nevinson \ (73) views the tunic as the staple Norman and English vestment in \ the Tapestry, and observes that these garments are “sometimes \ . . . slit back and front and so become full enough to resemble \ short trousers either with a hem below the knee or gathered into \ the knee.” Owen-Crocker (2ff.) differentiates between English \ and Norman dress in the Tapestry, and defines this divided skirt as \ a culotte, a one-piece garment; she argues that this style is not \ part of the English iconographic tradition and in the Tapestry \ applies distinctively, but not consistently, to the \ Normans.
\Through an intensive survey of dress and leggings in the \ Tapestry, Owen-Crocker demonstrates that, generally, English \ figures in the Tapestry wear short tunics which either flare or \ curl (e.g. panel 6 and panel 13, \ respectively), and figures from Ponthieu wear heavier tunics \ (e.g. panel 22), while Normans wear culottes. \ Based on early Scandinavian tapestries, Owen-Crocker \ argues that Norman culottes evidence the designers\' \ familarity with contemporary Norman dress and possibly reflects the \ Scandinavian origin of the Normans. Nevinson (73) notes the \ necessary existence of breeches because “if in the Tapestry \ the men wading had worn no breeches some of them would have \ appeared naked from the waist downwards, and similarly the slain, \ when stripped of their mail, would have been naked except for their \ shirts” (e.g. panel 7, panel 13, and panel 86). \ Hart \ (200, 148 and fig. 16) lists several manuscript traditions which \ also display hitched up tunics, and believes that in the tenth and \ eleventh centuries this motif was particular to Canterbury \ illumination. Owen-Crocker (5-7) surveys the alternating use of \ garters and cross-garters in the Tapestry and considers reasons for \ such stylistic shifts (e.g. panel 34). She also hypothesizes (7-8) \ that the early part of the Tapestry attempted to assign costume on \ the basis of function or trade (such as shipwrights and manual \ labor), but that such social or functional distinction disappears \ in the later sections of the Tapestry. Finally, though he has in \ several instances thoroughly detailed the types of dress \ represented in the Tapestry, Nevinson (75) concludes with a warning \ not to take the textile too literally as a source for period dress, \ as many styles were potentially copied from other pictorial \ sources. Gameson (1997, 196-197) observes that \ in the Tapestry, "people, especially important ones, do change \ their clothes, and in a sense such variations are naturalistic." \ Caviness (1998, 171) reads the style of \ hair and dress in certain scenes in the Tapestry in terms the \ gendered representation of power and the feminization of the \ English: "The Anglo-Saxons are shown with their hair in a bob, and \ their tunics are short; Normans shaved their faces and the nape of \ their necks, and preferred mid-calf apparel."
'; details["End"]={"ref":"End","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"End of the Tapestry"}; details["End"].html='End of the Tapestry
\The Tapestry breaks off without completion, but how much \ of the Tapestry is missing is unknown. No doubt it was much damaged \ by its method of early storage (cf. Museum: \ Winch). Brooks (1978, 2) studies the lengths of \ the previous joinings of the Tapestry given by Bertrand \ (1966, 24-27) and proposes that somewhere between 1.35 to 3 meters \ (3 -7 feet) may be missing (cf. Introduction: Manufacture & \ Length). As contemporary accounts of William\'s activities \ after Hastings detail the fall of London and William\'s subsequent \ coronation as king of England on Christmas Day, 1066, most scholars \ concerned imagine that the Tapestry likewise recorded these events, \ and ended with an iconographic depiction of a crowned and enthroned \ William. Such a finish would structurally mirror the Tapestry\'s \ opening (in panel 1), provide a contrastive balance \ to Harold\'s own coronation scene (in panel 72), and render the linear nature \ of the Tapestry\'s narrative cyclical as well. See Stenton \ (1957, 23), Digby (1957, 53), Gibbs-Smith (1957, 188), Werckmeister (1976, 558), Parisse \ (1983, 36-40), Wilson (1985, 200), and Brilliant (1997, 114) for \ representative discussions of this matter.
\In 1997, Jan Messent finished embroidering a commissioned \ reconstruction of the missing end of the Tapestry for Madeira \ Threads (see Museum: End of the Tapestry). Messent \ appears to draw chiefly upon one historical source, version D of \ the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Library: Anglo-Saxon Chronicle \ (¦7-8)). Her eight foot conclusion to the Tapestry, however, \ includes versions of the two details commonly thought to have been \ present in the textile -- the surrender of Anglo-Saxon nobility in \ London to William, and the duke\'s coronation as king. Foys (2003, \ forthcoming) discusses the accuracy and hermeneutic \ implications of creating such an ending; for the creator\'s own \ account of the manufacture of this end, see Messent (1999, \ 72-77). Foys also includes a complete survey of details that could \ have been included in the end of the Tapestry, based on readings of \ all the extant literary accounts of the event.
\Based on William of Malmesbury\'s account (Library: \ Malmesbury (¶21)), Cowdrey \ (1997, 104-105) conjectures that the end of the Tapestry would \ include a scene of William allowing Harold\'s mother to bury the \ fallen king. Lethieullier (1767, 2), Abbé de \ la Rué (translated in Douce (1814, 94)), and Maclagan \ (1949, 14) raise the possibility that the Tapestry was never \ finished at all. Loomis (1923, 7) novelly argues that if \ the Tapestry was made for Bayeux Cathedral, it was made too long \ and cut down by monks to fit the nave.
\A few early scholars have contemplated the "finished" quality of \ the extant work. Gurney (1817, 376) considers the work \ "complete in its history," and (361) writes, "whereas it is an \ apologetical History of the Claims of William to the Crown of \ England, and of the breach of faith, and fall of Harold; [it] is a \ perfect and finished action." A century later, Lethaby \ (1917, 137) argues against ending the work with the coronation of \ William, as this "would be an anti-climax to Harold\'s terrible doom \ and those stark corpses." Lewis (1999, 132-134) argues against \ providing more of an ending than is extant, as the \ "quasi-oral" nature of the piece demands not such a fixed text, but \ rather a more "open-ended" narration that more readily accommodates \ the fluctuation of performance and reception. For a discussion of \ the specific details of the current "end" of the Tapestry, see the \ commentary for panel 173.
'; details["Fables"]={"ref":"Fables","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Fables"}; details["Fables"].html='Fables
\The borders of the Tapestry contain a number of fables \ derived from Aesop\'s collection. For discussions of identification, \ merit, and meaning of individual fables, see the commentary for the \ appropriate panels.
\The number of fables scholars have found in the Tapestry \ varies widely, from the commonly accepted nine in panels 6 - 17 and \ elsewhere (see Chefneux (1934, 1ff.) and McNulty \ (1989, 27ff.)) to over 40 (see Herrmann \ (1964, 5-13) who also identifies a Horation episode in panel 39 and a \ fable from the Distichs of Cato in panel 77). Interpretations of the \ function of the marginalized fables have also varied widely. \ Wormald (1957, 27-28) and Grape (1994, \ 42) argue that the fables serve a purely decorative purpose, and \ therefore have no semantic interaction with the central narrative. \ Verrier (1946, 5), Dodwell \ (1966, 559), and Cowdrey (1997, 100-101) view the fables \ as a strategy to moralize Harold\'s treachery and betrayal. \ Conversely, Bernstein (1986, 129-135) regards the \ fables as satirizing the Norman point of view and taking the \ English side, as supposedly espoused by Eadmer of Canterbury. \ McNulty (1989, 27-31) writes that \ "these fables supply a carefully attuned commentary on the main \ story," and that the positioning of these fables in the first \ section of the Tapestry is "in keeping with the practice of \ introducing exemplary material near the opening of stories to \ suggest major themes." Likewise, Terkla \ (1995, 269ff.) reviews and specifically interprets each fable in \ relation to the action of the central narrative. For Terkla, the \ fables explicitly "add depth to the characters\' development, \ comment upon and moralize their personal motives for their \ political actions."
\Swanton (1995, 157-159) cautions \ against such "over-readings." However, Hicks (1992, \ 256-257) points out the difficulties in settling on the exact moral \ of these fables, as they could vilify Harold or, given the \ tradition of fables as subversive, conversely support Harold. She \ finds this latter position somewhat untenable though, since she \ believes that the audience was more than likely Norman. Hicks also \ (255) believes that the fables relate more to themselves than to \ the central narrative in the early sequence and asserts that the \ large amounts of fable-narrative in the first two sections suggest \ that it was an experiment dropped in the later sections. Lewis (1999, \ 59-73) argues that the fables function as neutral, liminal events \ which must be morally configured by the viewer, and as such their \ meaning can vary according to audience. As "ideological \ battlegrounds," the first representations of fables allow viewers \ to choose between Insular and Continental structures of power; \ later representations of fables, however, contain the transgressive \ values of Anglo-Saxon sympathy and force the audience to accept the \ cultural and political transformation to Anglo-Norman.
\A few critics have examined possible sources for these \ fables. Chefneux (1934, 1ff.) studies later \ fable collections and concludes that a stemma exists which shows an \ English source for the fables in the textile. Since then, however, \ several scholars have directly or indirectly taken issue with her \ findings. Goldschmidt (1947, 44-47) notes that \ Arnoldus, abbot of Fleury (1030-1032), redecorated his refectory \ with paintings from the fables of Aesop and that Fleury itself \ possessed, according to its old catalogues, several manuscripts \ containing fables of Aesop. Brooks (1978, 10) points out that while \ this collection of fables may have originated in England, they \ certainly may have crossed the Channel to the Continent in the \ eleventh century. Yapp (1987, 34) states that "it seems \ reasonable to accept that there was an English version of Aesop\'s \ fables on which the Bayeux Tapestry pictures might have been \ based," but cautions that only the contemporary \ manuscripts that are illustrated with fables are Continental, and \ that in England he "could find none earlier than the fourteenth \ century." Hicks (1992, 253-255) notes that fables \ occur in several Continental wall paintings as well as in English \ stone carvings, but that the repeated use of certain fables \ indicates that the artist was either working from several \ manuscript sources, or "creating his own formula."
\Index: fables (commonly accepted attributions are \ in plain text, questionable attributions are \ italicized)
\panel 6 - The Fox, the Crow and the \
Cheese (also panel 40, panel 63);
\
panel 7 - \
The Wolf and the Lamb;
\
panel 8 - \
The Pregnant She-Wolf (also panel 135);
\
panel 9 - \
The Wolf and the Crane (also panel 62);
\
panel 10 \
- The Lion King;
\
panel 11 \
- The Mouse, the Frog and the Kite;
\
panel 12 \
- The Wolf and the Billy-Goat (alternate: panels 12 - 16 - \
The Goat Who Sang);
\
panel 14 \
- The Envious Fox;
\
panels \
15 - 16 - The Lion\'s Share (aka. "The Lion and his Hunting Party," \
alternate: panels 15 - 17 - The Stag and Lion in a \
Cave);
\
panel 16 \
- The Lion and the Donkey Hunting;
\
panel 21 \
- The Lion and the Horse;
\
panel 21 \
- The Swallow and the Birds;
\
panel 26 \
- The Horse and the Boar;
\
panel 27 \
- The Stag;
\
panel 30 \
- The Maiden and her Suitors;
\
panel 37 \
- The Jackdaw and the Peacock;
\
panel 38 \
- The Wolf Doctor;
\
panel 38 \
- The Axe;
\
panel 39 \
- The Childbirth;
\
panel 40 \
- The Fox, the Crow and the Cheese (also panel 6, panel 63) \
(alternate: The Fox and the Eagle);
\
panel 44 \
- The Serpent Familiar (alternate: The Villager and the \
Serpent);
\
panel 47 \
- The Two Cocks and the Sparrowhawks;
\
panel 49 \
- The Dog and the Sheep;
\
panel 62 \
- The Wolf and the Crane (also panel 9) (alternate: The Dog with the \
Meat) (alternate: The Goose and the Stork);
\
panel 63 \
- The Fox, the Crow and the Cheese (also panel 6, panel 40) \
(alternate: The Fox and the Lark);
\
panel 97 \
- The Old Dog;
\
panel \
102 - The Fox and the Lion;
\
panel \
123 - The Widow and the Soldier;
\
panel \
124 - The Young Man and the Courtesan;
\
panel \
125 - The Ass and the Wolf \'Doctor\';
\
panel \
126 - The Hare and the Sparrow;
\
panel \
130 - The Weasel and the Man;
\
panel \
135 - The Pregnant She-Wolf (also panel 8) (alternate: The She-Cat, the \
Hare and the Eagle);
\
panel \
136 - The Jay and the Peacock;
\
panel \
138 - The Wolf and the Dog;
\
panel \
139 - The Two Mules;
\
panel \
140 - The Fox and the Billy-Goat;
\
panel \
140 - The Cat and the Chickens;
\
panel \
140 - The Panther;
Hairstyles
\For a part of the Tapestry, its makers helped viewers to \ distinguish English and Norman characters by showing the different \ hairstyles of these two cultures. Normans are generally depicted as \ clean-shaven, with shaved backs of heads (a cut which Bates (2001, \ 121) believes has roots in Viking style), while the English are \ generally shown sporting full heads of hair and moustaches. It is \ important to note, however, that such hairstyles are not always \ faithful; halfway through the Tapestry its makers stopped \ differentiating between nationalities through hairstyle. The \ Anglo-Saxon figures begin the Tapestry wearing moustaches, but the \ Normans do not acquire their trademark of shaven heads until \ panel 17. \ As Grape (1994, 119, 129) observes, from \ panel 62 \ onward the distinction collapses, as the Anglo-Saxons stop \ consistently displaying moustaches. Furthermore, from panel 86 onward, \ the Normans begin to lose their distinctive hairstyles as well. \ Fowke (1898, 71) argues that from \ panels 61 \ - 63, the English temporarily take Norman hairstyles upon their \ return to England. Nevinson (1957, 74) considers the \ beards found on the Norman shipwrights (see panel 84) and on \ members of the Anglo-Saxon levies (see panel 157) \ indicators of old age. Wilson (1985, 208, n. 178) posits \ consonance between the bare back of heads of the Normans and a \ "condemnatory description of Danish shaven necks" in an Old English \ letter (on denisc ableredum hneccan). Yapp (1987, \ 28) describes two contemporary stone carvings from England which \ show moustaches similar to those in the Tapestry. Caviness \ (1998, 171) reads the style of hair and dress in certain scenes in \ the Tapestry in terms the gendered representation of power and the \ feminization of the English: "The Anglo-Saxons are shown with their \ hair in a bob, and their tunics are short; Normans shaved their \ faces and the nape of their necks, and preferred mid-calf apparel." \ For a general discussion of hairstyles in Anglo-Saxon England, see \ Dodwell (1982, 222).
\Index: hairstyles (not comprehensive), mustachioed, \ throughout the Tapestry; bearded, panel 1, panel 23, panel 38(?), \ panel 65, \ panel 70, \ panel 84, \ panels 93 \ - 94, panel 99, panel 110, \ panel \ 112, panels 144 - 146, panel 157, \ panel \ 165, panel 168, panel 170, \ panel \ 173; stubbled(?) panel 70; curly or wavy, panel 114; \ Norman shaven heads begin, panel 17; Norman shaven heads end, \ panel 86; \ tonsured, panel 39, panel 69, \ panel 70, \ panel 72, \ panel 80, \ panel \ 112, panel 113; balding, panel 70, \ panel \ 118; windblown, panel 28; used to determine the \ nationality and purpose of messenger, panel 75, \ panel \ 78.
'; details["Horses"]={"ref":"Horses","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Horses"}; details["Horses"].html='Horses & Equestrian Equipment
\Next to men, horses are the most depicted figures in the \ central scenes of the Tapestry. Bernstein (1986, 72) comments that this \ is not surprising, as the technological achievements of the tenth \ and eleventh centuries are in part made possible by this animal. In \ comparison to Anglo-Saxon military culture, Harfield \ (1996, 172) describes the use of horses and cavalry tactics by the \ Normans as "a fundamentally different form of social organization" \ integral to feudalism.
\Even a cursory glance at the Tapestry reveals that a good \ deal of attention was paid to the careful and accurate depiction of \ horses in the textile. Davis (1988, 68-69) counts between \ 179-186 horses in the central narrative, and sorts them by color \ (four main hues), type (mostly stallions), mane (five styles), and \ moods (smug, angry, etc.). Davis also notes two dead horses, a \ plough horse, and a mule in the borders. He also estimates the \ general size of the Tapestry\'s horses at about fourteen hands tall. \ Gibbs-Smith (1973, 9) goes as far as to \ characterize the designer of the work as "obsessed" with horses. \ Fowke (1898, 35) points out that Norman \ horses are generally shown to be larger than English horses, while \ Maclagan (1949, 23) notes that the \ English horses are distinguished by their hogged (shaved) manes, \ while Norman horses generally wear their manes long. Davis (70-82) \ provides an excellent summary of historical evidence for the \ evolution and value of Norman warhorses, as well as a comparison to \ the type and valuation of Anglo-Saxon horses. Likewise, Keefer \ (1996, 129-132) treats the differences of English and Norman horses \ in the Tapestry in some detail, observing that the immediate \ distinguishing difference is "in physical bulk and back length." \ Keefer also disputes Maclagan\'s assertion that English horses\' \ manes are hogged, arguing that many Norman horses appear similarly, \ and that the depiction of these manes may fall to the other side of \ the horse, be closely braided, or represent differences in Iberian \ and non-Iberian characteristics in the Norman equestrian stock. \ Keefer concludes by assessing the English horses in the Tapestry as \ revealing an "Arab, or true oriental stock" in contrast to the \ Norman horses\' "heavier and longer-backed Iberian \ lines."
\Wilson (1985, 176-177) and Mann (1957, \ 68) have the best summaries of the equestrian equipment of the \ Tapestry. Generally, the saddles have a high bow and cantle, and \ both curl outwards. These saddles usually have a girth buckled at \ the side and attached underneath the saddle by rivets, and the \ saddle flaps spread out in a broad triangle (e.g. panel 24). \ Fowke (1898, 30) considers the saddles \ to be made of wood. The stirrup leathers are adjustable, as the \ rider\'s legs are usually only slightly bent, and the stirrups are \ often clearly shown. Breast-bands commonly have a pendant at the \ junction with the saddle. The reins consist of two straps held \ together by buttons or slides below the horse\'s jaw and towards the \ man\'s hand; they also often show strap-ends. The form of the \ stirrup is close to that generally found in tenth- and \ eleventh-century England. Brown (1981, 14) points out that these \ "built-up saddle-bows hold the rider in his seat at the shock \ of contact, and the very long stirrup leathers [. . .] \ afford the same security." Such a design, Brown contends, allows \ for the use of couched lances in battle. Kiff (1985, \ 193) discusses "the long strap which hangs down from some of the \ saddles." She references Fowke (22), who suggests that they are \ variations of a basilard, or hunting knife, while noting \ that others suggest it is an "overlong girth strap" left hanging \ (e.g. panel 24). Wilson observes that \ surviving stirrups from this period "are triangular in shape with \ an iron loop at the top . . . a few stirrups of A-S and Viking \ times have the loop placed in the same plane as the stirrup leather \ and not at right-angles to it.” Mann considers the spurs \ shown in the Tapestry all to be of the goad form. He notes that the \ goads “are usually pyramidal or ball-shaped with a short \ point projecting from the ball," but that "the scale of the \ Tapestry prevents these small adjuncts from being shown in detail." \ Mann also comments that a few footmen are shown wearing spurs, but \ considers this an oversight on behalf of the \ embroiderers.
\Carter (1988, 30-35) discusses the \ sporting features of riding and hunting. Bachrach \ (1985, 505-531) studies the nature and development of the Norman \ horse-transports used in William\'s invasion of England.
\Index: horses and riding equipment, panels 2 - 3, \ panels 14 \ - 19, panel 24, panel 26, \ panels 29 \ - 35, panels 40 - 43, panels 45 - 54, \ panel 56, \ panel 63, \ panels 91 \ - 92, panels 104 - 105, panel 107, \ panel \ 121, panels 123 - 130, panels 132 - \ 144, panels 147ff.; pulling plough and \ harrow (border), panels 21 - 22; diminutive nature of \ Guy\'s, panel 31; pack mule, panel 108; fall \ fording river, panel 44; transported by ship, panels 92 - 102, \ Glossary: \ The Norman Channel-Crossing; unloaded from ships, \ panel \ 102, Museum: \ Disembarking Horse; fall in ditch/on spikes, \ panels \ 155 - 156, Museum: Tumbling Horse; top views of \ (border), panel 156, panel 158; \ basilard, panel 14, panel \ 24.
'; details["Inscript"]={"ref":"Inscript","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Inscriptions"}; details["Inscript"].html='Inscriptions
\Throughout the Tapestry, a series of fifty-seven Latin \ inscriptions comments on the action depicted in the central \ narrative. The figurations of these inscriptions are mostly rustic, \ square capitals, augmented by a mixture of semi-uncials, and all \ characters are about 1" high. Wilson (1985, 204) considers the \ individual letters "drawn from a mixture of both epigraphic and \ manuscript models . . . thus the form of the serifs of the letters \ is more typical of inscriptions, while the tall L and the \ word-dividing symbols are of a type more normally found in \ manuscripts."
\Wormald (1957b, 177) provides a concise \ survey of these figures, and notes that the semi-uncials are mostly \ of small es and hs, and two incidences of small \ ds (see panel 2 and panel 9), and two \ incidences of small ms (see panel 4 and panel 30). \ Short (2001, 270ff.) provides a \ thorough study of the epigraphy, abbreviations, orthography, \ inflexions, vocality, and punctuation of the inscriptions. He \ further notes that the first linen section of the Tapestry contains \ uncial characters and punctuation found nowhere else in the \ textile, and argues for the compositional quality of this section \ separating it from the rest of the work. Wormald marks the shift at \ panel \ 112 from single, dark-threaded characters to multi-colored \ inscriptions (Short (2001, 273) notes that the \ lettering alternates between the original color and terracotta or \ sage green, with the introduction of a third color, old gold, at \ panel \ 133), a characteristic which remains for the rest of the Tapestry. \ He also records the numerous standard abbreviations which occur \ throughout the work, commenting that all abbreviations and \ diacritical marks can be found in other contemporary inscriptions \ or manuscript display script. Parisse (1983, 79-80) writes of the \ punctuation that "the end of a sentence is sometimes shown by a \ colon or three signs in the form of a triangle (two dots and a \ dash) . . . full stops also separate words from each other, they \ were not used for punctuation." For Parisse, the inscriptions \ function as sound does for a film. Short (2001, \ 270-271) charts the forms of punctuation used, noting their \ distribution across the sections of the Tapestry, and observes (n. \ 7) that while it becomes heavy in the fifth section of the work \ (panels \ 110 - 125), the punctuation of the final three sections is \ particularly light.
\Gameson (1997, 181-191) reviews the \ operation of the inscriptions of the piece. He states that the \ punctes of the text functions to separate the words and render them \ more legible. Brilliant (1997, 128-134) believes that \ the inscriptions constitute a "stripped-down" version of the \ central narrative, "apparently subordinated visually and \ functionally to the larger figural image of the Tapestry." He also \ considers that the inscriptions may have served as prompts for an \ oral performer. Short (2001) contains the most recent \ and perhaps most thorough consideration of the character of the \ inscriptions. Short describes their purpose as "an authorising \ adjunct to the embroidery, a clerical seal of approval . . . \ spelled out in the authoritative language of learning, \ historiography, and record. The text, in other words, validated the \ images" (270). Lesieur (1992, passim), uses \ Post-structural theory to explore the interplay of the "visible" \ and the "readable" and concludes that the inscriptions function in \ two ways: while the text provided often helps to locate or refine \ the meaning of the visual material presented, the inscriptions can \ also further support moments of indeterminate or conflicted double \ meaning, some of which arise because of the conflicted nature of \ the cultures which respectively ordered and executed the textual \ and visual narrative. Secondly, the inscriptions, like the \ indicating hand gestures in the Tapestry, serve a deictic purpose, \ and help to spatialize the force of the work\'s linear narrative \ into shorter, more forceful moments of discourse. In a less \ developed claim, Caviness (1991, 50, n. 9) believes that \ the conjunctions of the inscriptions at times can "be understood to \ indicate action occuring at a different time or in another place, \ or both." Lewis (1999, 11-12) discusses the \ inscriptions and punctes in terms of audience and performance, \ noting that the included text in effect translates and converts the \ visual material, and "shifts the narrative into an \ assertive mode." Lewis also notes (23) that the inscription\'s \ "transitive, present-tense verbal phrases [erase] all links between \ the author and his text, as well as between the text and its \ public." Cholakian (1997, 47) argues that the \ declarative nature of the inscriptions points to the dominance of \ the iconographic sign; for Cholakian, the inscriptions are "at best \ a verbal frame . . . for visual readers."
\Though some critics, such as Edwards \ (1975, 21) and McNulty (1989, 59), automatically \ assume that the inscriptions are fully integrated with the \ pictorial narrative, it is important to recognize, as Grape (1994, \ 59) does, that the often cramped execution of the lettering may \ indicate that the text came after the images, and may have not been \ even intended by the initial designer. As such, the inscriptions \ may serve as the first interpretation or reception of the events of \ the Tapestry. Grape, in fact, argues for a number of what he calls \ "scribes" based on the extreme inconsistencies in the text\'s \ nomenclature and grammar. Because of her theory of the Tapestry\'s \ manufacture (see Introduction: Manufacture & Length), \ Koslin (1990, 42) likewise finds a \ different hand behind the inscriptions, and argues that they must \ have been embroidered after the central narrative and the borders. \ Conversely, Gameson (1997, 185-186) does not \ consider the inscriptions to have come afterwards, while Short (2001, \ 268, 270) observes that none of the seven sectional joins in the \ Tapestry occur within a word of the inscriptions, and argues that \ the inscriptions must not be considered an afterthought, but "an \ original and integral part of the Tapestry\'s design" (see further \ discussion below). Bertrand (1997, 31-32) and Bachrach \ (1987, passim) approach the inscriptions as the textual \ template from which the designers derived the images and sequences \ of the Tapestry. Bachrach argues that the inscriptions are actually \ a degraded and at times mistaken form of an original source text \ provided by Odo (and conjecturally reconstructed by \ Bachrach (27-28)).
\Since Abbé de la Rue argued in 1811 that the inscriptions \ prove the Englishness of the Tapestry (see Douce (1814, \ 100)), critics have debated whether the text can reveal origin. In \ the last century, critics on both side of the Channel (see Loomis \ (1923, 3-7)) and Lepelley (1964, 313-321)) asserted the \ English nature of the inscriptions through specific examples, most \ notably Bagias in panel 57 and Gyr¶ in \ panel \ 151. Likewise Brooks (1978, 10) contends that the \ inscriptions "reflect the influence of both vernacular English and \ to a lesser extent vernacular French -- a mixture that one finds in \ post-conquest England rather than Normandy." And Bernstein (1986, 39) holds that \ "Anglo-Saxon forms of lettering and spelling leave little doubt \ that English workers were engaged in its manufacture." \ However, Wormald (1957b, 177) states that \ "neither the forms of letters nor the abbreviations throw any light \ on the origin of the work," and Grape (1994, 59) demonstrates that a \ number of Norman sources use Anglo-Saxon forms found in the \ Tapestry. Furthermore, Grape (60) suggests a northern Italian \ influence in the lettering and the possibility that Norman \ "scribes" simply checked their nomenclature against English \ documents when glossing the textile. Short (2001, \ 273-278), however, based on a careful study of inflexion, usage, \ and orthography, argues that "the vernacular underlying the Latin \ of the inscription is . . . demonstrably French and not English." \ Short further surveys the Latin vocabulary of the inscriptions and \ argues that much of it is based on calque and interference from \ Medieval French, concluding that a French speaker must have \ composed the inscriptions. Developing his argument, Short submits \ that several hands executed the inscriptions, but that one person \ composed them, and that on the basis of the inscriptions, a \ chronology and geography of the Tapestry\'s order and places of \ manufacture may be divined (see Introduction: Manufacture & \ Length ).
\Bertrand (1997, 35) believes that a \ number of inscriptions throughout the piece were embroidered with a \ chain stitch, and that this technique was used by restorers and \ replaced the usual stem stitch (see panel 71).
'; details["Reversal"]={"ref":"Reversal","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Reversals of Narrative"}; details["Reversal"].html='Reversals of Narrative
\In two scenes of the Tapestry, the direction of the \ narrative appears to work in reverse. In panels 22 - 27, \ William\'s messengers travel right to left to reach Guy\'s palace at \ Beaurain. In panels 66 - 70, the order of King \ Edward\'s death and funeral procession are reversed as the viewer \ first sees Edward\'s body carried into Westminster Abbey, and then \ the scene of his deathbed and body preparation. Critics have \ considered these scenes together and separately in attempts to \ divine their significance. In the case of William\'s messengers, the \ question of whether a reversal actually occurs, or if rather two \ sets of messengers are represented, has also been debated. See the \ commentaries for panel 22 and panel 66 for \ discussions of respective reversals.
\Index: reversals, William\'s messengers, panels 22 - 27; \ Edward\'s death, panels 66 - 70.
'; details["Ships"]={"ref":"Ships","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Ships"}; details["Ships"].html='Ships
\Sailing vessels occur in five sections of the Tapestry: \ Harold\'s trip to and from Normandy (in panels 8 - 12 and \ panel \ 61), a messenger from England to Duke William (in panel 77), \ shipbuilding (in panels 84 - 85), and William\'s invasion \ fleet (in panels 92 - 103). For details of \ individual ships represented in the Tapestry, see the commentary \ for the individual panels.
\In his history of the English Channel, Williamson \ (1959, 83) examines the Norman ships in the Tapestry and estimates \ their measurements at about "forty feet long, broad in beam, and \ perhaps four deep in water." The ships depicted in the Tapestry \ have been compared to a number of excavated Scandinavian ships. \ Gillmor (1996, 118ff.) has the most \ comprehensive analyses, and argues that the Tapestry helps to prove \ that the ships of William\'s fleet were considerably varied in \ design and size. However, see Wilson (1985, 175, 226) and Grape (1994, \ 33-38) for additional comments on the typology of the Tapestry\'s \ ships. Though Gillmor finds strict structural parallels between the \ ships of the Tapestry and excavated remains, Wilson (226) purports \ that the ships of the Tapestry are formulaic in depiction and \ cautions against any strict parallels to extant models. Neumann \ (1989, 229-243) studies the hydrodynamic aspects (sails, draught, \ length, and speed) of both surviving and depicted ships in relation \ to William\'s scheduling and execution of the Channel \ crossing.
\Scholars have noticed a few differences between the \ English and Norman ships in the textile. Parisse \ (1983, 122) contends that the English type of batten, or helms-oar, \ "was all of one piece from top to bottom," while the Norman batten \ "has a sort of hand grip." Wilson (1985, 226) notes that most \ English ships are missing the central plank of the gunwale, while \ Norman gunwales run straight across. Gibbs-Smith (1973, 13 and plate 41) \ maintains that the depictions of shields on the gunwales while the \ ships are at sea betray the designer\'s lack of nautical knowledge. \ Likewise, Bachrach (1987, 11-12, 21), following \ from Bachrach (1985, 505-531), studies the \ Tapestry\'s representation of William\'s horse transports, and \ concludes that the designer was ignorant of the specialized \ structures needed for, and the difficulties attendant \ to, transporting and landing horses in battle-ready condition (see \ also panel 102). Conversely, Grape (1994, \ 33-38) believes that the Tapestry provides evidence that the \ textile\'s designer was quite experienced at seamanship (see also \ the commentary for panel 11). Grape also reviews several \ possible reasons that the artist included shields on the gunwales, \ including a debate concerning inside mounting, and the decorative \ tradition of such representations. Gibbs-Smith (13) suggests that \ the shields (or shield-like structures) at bow and stern of some \ ships in William\'s fleet might be a variation of the "ancient \ aphlaston or anti-ramming protection." Grape (35-36) finds \ such a thesis "scarcely convincing" as such shields would hardly \ have been sufficient protection. Additionally, Grape points out \ that grappling, not ramming, was the standard form of naval battle, \ and that if ships did happen to ram, it would be amidships, not at \ the stern or prow.
\For a debate on the quality and character of the sails of \ Tapestry vessels, see a series of four articles and responses by \ André W. Sleeswyk and Owain T.P. Roberts in vols. 67 and 68 \ of Mariner\'s Mirror. Grape (35) comments that patterned \ sails such as those found here were common in Scandinavia in the \ tenth century, and discusses the potentially Scandinavian and/or \ pagan qualities of the ships\' figureheads.
\Several scholars, including Wormald \ (1957, 31) and Dodwell (1976, 57), have suggested a \ parallel between the ships of the Tapestry and the illumination of \ Noah\'s ark in MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f. 15r. Wormald also compares \ the figureheads to those seen in MS Junius 11. Yapp (1987, \ 24) refutes such a comparison, and argues that "beyond the fact \ that the prows in both are zoomorphic they have no resemblance." \ Grape (1994, 36) notes the above \ comparisons, but relates several Continental analogues as well. \ Most recently, Hart (2000, 145 and fig. 14) believes \ that the figureheads derive mostly from illustrations in Brit. Lib. \ MS Cotton Claudius Biv. Hart also thinks it improbable that the \ ships quickly constructed especially for the invasion would have \ had such elaborate figureheads.
\For discussions of the construction of Norman ships, see \ Glossary: \ Norman Shipbuilding. For a discussion of the \ conditions and details of William\'s Channel crossing, see Glossary: Channel \ Crossing.
\Index: ships, Harold\'s, panels 8 - 12, \ panel \ 61; "threatening" border ships beneath Harold\'s \ throne, panel 75; Anglo/Norman messenger in, \ panel 77; \ William orders construction of, panel 80, construction of, panels 81 - 87; \ discussions of construction, panel 81, panel 84, \ Glossary: \ Norman Shipbuilding; William\'s Channel crossing, \ panels 92 \ - 101, Museum: \ Normans in a Ship, Glossary: Channel \ Crossing; William\'s flagship, panel 98, \ Museum: Ship \ Masts; unloading horses from, panel 102, \ Museum: \ Disembarking Horse; beached on landing, panel 103; \ anchors, panel 13, panel 78; \ sounding leads, panel 11, panel 77; \ description of seamen\'s activity, panel 11.
'; details["Tools"]={"ref":"Tools","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Tools and Implements"}; details["Tools"].html='Tools and Implements
\To date, there is no dedicated study of the tools (other \ than weapons and equestrian \ gear) used by the various tradesmen and agrarian \ workers depicted in the Tapestry, though Wilson \ (1985, 213-228) does touch on a few items in his section \ "Buildings, Dress and Objects." See the individual panels for \ information concerning specific items.
\Index: tools and implements, axes, panel 80, \ panels 81 \ - 84, panel 106, panel 108; \ bells, panel 68; bowls and cups, panels 5 - 6, \ panel \ 112; cooking (hearth, oven, sideboard and spits), panels 109 - \ 111; farming equipment (plough, harrow, slingstones, and seedbag), \ panels 21 \ - 23; hunting, panels 3 - 4, panel 27; jesses, \ panel 3, \ panel 18, \ panel 34; \ lantern(?), panel 98; purse or bag(?), panel 123; \ sailing, related to, panels 7 - 13, panel 61, \ panels 77 \ - 78, panels 92 - 101; shipbuilding (adzes, \ axes, drills, and hammers), panel 80, panels 81 - 86, \ especially panel 81 and panel 84; shovels \ and spades, 115-116; torches, panel 52, panel 118, \ panel \ 20(?); wagon, panel 89; wine tun, panel 88; \ indeterminate, panel 6, panel \ 107.
'; details["Vegetati"]={"ref":"Vegetati","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Vegetation"}; details["Vegetati"].html='Vegetation
\Most vegetation shown in the Tapestry is arboreal. The \ trees principally function as some buildings in the Tapestry do: to \ mark boundaries between individual narrative episodes. On occasion, \ vegetation also contributes to the matter of the narrative, as in \ the ship-building scene in panel 81, the scouting scene in \ panel \ 131, and perhaps in the final moments of the Tapestry (see panel 173). \ Parisse (1983, 59) views trees and \ buildings as subdividing the textile into a series of filmic \ scenes, while Grape (1994, 69) ascribes a powerful \ sense of agency to trees as they emphasize the opening and closing \ of narrative moments. Additionally, Huppé (1982, 27-28) considers \ the use of nature in the Tapestry as an example of the shifting \ spiritual concerns of the English Christian realm from religious \ mission to religious crusade. Rud (1996, 15) interprets some trees of \ the Tapestry as representations of the "tree of life", an offshoot \ of the old Nordic ash Ygdrasil. Several scholars have proposed \ manuscript analogues for the vegetation in the work. Wormald \ (1957, 30-31) regards the "bunches of rather pointed leaves and \ curious teat-like buds" to derive from "an emaciated acanthus \ scroll with its leaves stretched out into long serpentine strands," \ and proposes a Canterbury manuscripts as a possible source, citing \ British Lib. MS Cotton Claudius Biv, f. 36v. This comparison has \ since been refuted by Wilson (1985, 209), Yapp (1987, \ 23), and Grape (1994, 64). Wilson and Bernstein (1986, 77) also cite \ analogues to British Lib. MS Cotton Tiberius B.v (see Museum: Cutting \ Trees). Wilson (212) and Grape (64) suggest further \ stylistic parallels with Scandinavian Ringerike style.
\Index: vegetation, trees, panel 4, panel 16, \ panel 21, \ panel 27, \ panel 34, \ panel 76, \ panel 79, \ panel \ 122, panel 133, panel 157, \ panel \ 173; trees, chopping down, panels 81 - 83; trees representing \ woods, panel 131, panel 173(?); \ vegetation mimicking wounded, panel 154; refugees hiding in(?), \ panel \ 173; vegetation in borders (does not include vegetal enscrollment), \ panel 6, \ panel 12, \ panel 14, \ panels 16 \ - 17, panels 24 - 27, panel 32, \ panel 34, \ panel 40, \ panel 50, \ panel 63, \ panel 71, \ panel \ 125, panel 173; border animals eating, \ panel 56, \ panel 58, \ panel \ 81.
'; details["Weapons"]={"ref":"Weapons","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Weapons"}; details["Weapons"].html='Weapons in the Tapestry
\For overviews of Norman and Anglo-Saxon weapons used at \ Hastings, see Mann (1957, 64-68), Peirce \ (1988), and Wright (1996, 60-72). Sullivan (1999, 666-667), \ writing from a medical perspective, assesses the nature of wounds \ sustained from weapons used in the battle:
\penetrating wounds and lacerations from arrows, \ javelins, lances, and battle axes must have been common; \ presumably, the cavalry sustained close head injuries . . . \ Certainly no record exists of surgical amputations being effected \ or wounds being repaired. Infections must have been highly \ prevalent for those who survived their initial penetrating \ injuries."
\Axes:
\For possible discussion and significance of individual \ axes, see the commentary in the appropriate panel. Mann (1957, \ 66) compares the axes of the Tapestry to Viking, or "bearded", axes \ whose blades or heads evidence a slightly unsymmetrical outline, \ which would heighten the effectiveness of a downward cut. Peirce \ (1988, 245-248) shows examples of surviving eleventh-century \ axeheads, and comments on both the hazards and effectiveness of \ such axes in battle. Peirce also notes the existence of smaller \ throwing axes in the Tapestry (e.g. panel 145) and \ reports that one such axe-head was excavated from Hastings around \ 1978. Mann also calls attention to the T-headed and felling axes of \ the ship-building scene in panels 82 - 84 (cf. Glossary: Tools and \ Implements). Bennet (1980, 5) argues that battle \ axes in the peaceful scenes of the Bayeux Tapestry stand as symbols \ of authority, dignity, and peace, while others have stated that \ they may symbolize peril (e.g. panel 64 and \ panel \ 71).
\Index: axes, ceremonial, panel 22, \ panel 64, \ panel 65, \ panel 71; \ as tools, panel 80, panels 81 - 84, \ panel \ 106, panel 108; for/in battle, panel 88, \ panels \ 144 - 146, panel 150, panels 152 - \ 154, panel 157, panels 164 - \ 165, panels 169 - 170; in borders, panel 38, \ panel \ 123, panel 170.
\\
Bows and Arrows:
\The archers shown in the Tapestry, with the exception of the \ lone English bowman in panel 145, are Norman, and Mann (1957, \ 67-68) observes that Norman bows are smaller in size than the famed \ English longbow of later periods, though Wright \ (1996, 62) notes that longbows were known to the Normans. Mann also \ points out that William\'s archers only draw their bows to their \ body, not their ear (as in longbows) and reports a probable \ analogue in “the unique 4-foot specimen found on the site of \ Great Berkhamstead Castle, now in the British Museum, which is \ believed to date from the siege by Louis of France of 1216." \ Gibbs-Smith (1973, 7) comments that the \ "so-called Danish short bow," a bow similar to those shown here, \ was "a completely ineffective weapon against troops with shields." \ Gibbs-Smith also relates that "recent experiments have shown that \ an arrow fired with a flattish trajectory could penetrate and kill \ a \'hauberked\' man at about 50 yards; or, with a high trajectory, a \ descending shower of arrows could be sent for some 100 yards. But \ when confronted by a shield the arrow stuck harmlessly in its \ surface." The Tapestry argues the effectiveness of the Norman \ arrow: from panel 144 forward, arrows wound or kill \ many Englishmen, including (possibly) Harold (see panel 169). \ Peirce (1988, 248) provides a basic \ discussion of the nature and construction of bows from this period. \ Peirce also cites the free-standing quivers in the border of \ panel \ 165 as possible evidence of the presence of a new supply of arrows \ brought up from the rear. Morton and Muntz (1972, 113-115) argue \ for the depiction of a crossbow in panel 141; this assertion has been \ refuted by Brooks (1978, 20, n. 65). Wilson \ (1985, 225) considers it impossible to tell whether the arrows of \ the Tapestry were barbed or not, as the heads were constructed out \ of only two stitches each. Archers may be found in panel 141, \ panel \ 145, and along the lower border of panels 160 - 166. Rud (1996, 87) \ studies the changing trajectories of the border bowmen (see \ panel \ 164). This strategy is also noted in Henry of Huntingdon\'s account \ (Library: \ Huntingdon (¦6)). A mounted archer pursues \ the fleeing English in panel 172, though this figure could be \ a conjectural reconstruction. See Wright \ (1996, 59-62) for an extended discussion of the function and \ equipment of Norman archers.
\Index: archers, Norman, panel 141, panel 172; in \ border, panels 159 - 164, panels 165 - \ 167; English, panel 144; Harold killed by arrow(?), \ panel \ 169.
\\
Maces and Clubs:
\Both Thorne (1982, 48ff.) and Mann (1957, \ 66) have full discussions of the representation of maces and clubs \ in the Tapestry. For treatment of individual items, see the \ commentary for the appropriate panel. Both scholars argue that the \ mace-like weapons that William and Odo carry on three or four \ occasions are more like cudgels perhaps roughly cut from tree-wood, \ and concur, along with Brown (1977, 118), Wilson \ (1985, 225), and Cowdrey (1997, 95), that these \ represent ceremonial symbols of power. In panel 158, \ Cowdrey (n. 6) explicitly translates baculum as \ “staff” and not “mace,” noting that \ “the term \'mace\' is best reserved for an offensive weapon of \ similar size to the baculum but with a heavy head,” \ while Legge (1987, 84) views this object as \ the precursor to the modern baton.
\Index: maces and clubs, William\'s, panel 42, \ panel \ 127; Odo\'s, panel 158; other, panel 127, \ panel \ 144, panel 173(?).
\\
Spears and Lances:
\Both English and Normans are shown with spears and lances \ throughout the Tapestry. Though Mann (1957, 66-67) argues that there is \ virtually no difference in the depiction of these two weapons, \ Bruce (1856, 105, 107) distinguishes \ the Anglo-Saxon javelin from the Norman lance on the basis of size. \ He considers the English weapons shorter and used as a missile, \ while the heavier Norman model was designed for thrusting and based \ on a Roman predecessor. Parisse (1983, 90) also distinguishes \ between two types of spears: lancea, a javelin-lance, and \ contus, a banner-bearer lance, and states that the \ contus has a thicker staff and cannot be thrown, but was \ used to push the opponent to the ground. Parisse also reports that \ it was most likely invented by "a certain Geoffrey de Preuilly" \ around 1060 at Berry and views this as a forerunner of the \ traditional couched lance. Mann (1957, 66-67) observes that the \ heads of these weapons are “leaf shaped and vary in \ length.” Mann also calls attention to the horizontal \ cross-bar that often displays immediately below the blade, arguing \ that this feature derives from Anglo-Saxon spears and therefore is \ an indication of the fairly early date of the Tapestry. Several \ scholars have discussed the evidence the Tapestry presents for the \ early uses of the couched lance in battle. Flori (1988, \ 217-220) surveys 13 examples of the couched lance in combat in the \ Bayeux Tapestry and uses this evidence to point towards an earlier \ dating of the use of the couched lance, believing that it came \ about in the 1050s in Normandy, before both the Conquest and \ tournaments. Harfield (1996, \ 172), however, considers only six of the 35 lances employed on \ horseback to be held in the couched position. Kiff (1985, \ 192, n. 48) regards the Tapestry as the first English source to \ show couched lances, though she points out, as does Grape (1994, \ 25), that Continental sources contain earlier examples. Peirce \ (1988, 244-245) argues that the Tapestry records a moment of \ transition from the over-arm/under-arm mode to the couched mode of \ attack. Peirce also notes that the charging knights in panel 126 have \ placed their lances diagonally across the neck of their horses. \ This employment of the "nearside to nearside" method of attack did \ not become common until the late twelfth century, so it surprises \ Peirce to find it in the Tapestry. See also Brooks \ (1978, 19) and Brown (1984, 36-37) for discussions of \ couched lances in the Tapestry.
\Index: spears and lances may be found in almost \ every panel of the Tapestry after panel 13; stored on wagon, panel \ 89.
\Swords:
\Mann (1957, 65) describes the swords of \ the Tapestry as the straight and broad-bladed type directly \ descended from Viking forms. He notes that generally "the hand is \ protected by short quillions . . . the pommel consists of a short \ cross piece to which was affixed a semi-circular cap," and that \ this lobated pommel was by then going out of fashion. Mann also \ considers the grip to consist of "two laths of wood applied on \ either side of the tang . . . and then bound with cord or leather" \ and lists many extant parallels. The scabbards for such weapons \ were generally made of wood covered with leather. Peirce \ (1988, 250) notes no differences between English and Norman swords \ in the Tapestry. Wilson (1985, 224) observes that the \ typical sword was held in one hand and had "a broad, straight blade \ with parallel edges, was a little over 90 cm long and had a \ straight guard with a simple rounded or lobed pommel." Wilson \ characterizes this type as "a slashing, not a thrusting weapon," \ and points out that the swords here display guards curved toward \ the grip. This form of guard is not found in any surviving \ artifacts, though guards which curve away from the grip are well \ documented in English swords. From this fact, Wilson concludes that \ the artist lacked military knowledge. Panels 19 - 20 \ demonstrate a belt-and-buckle method of fastening the sword around \ the waist. A few swords also disappear inside of the mail coat, and \ Grape (1994, 26) comments that \ depicting sword and scabbard on the inside of a mail coat was a \ common feature in Continental art (e.g. panel \ 55).
\Index: swords appear consistently throughout \ the Tapestry; buckles and belts of, panels 19 - 20; as symbol of Edward\'s \ will(?), panel 20; as symbol of state, panel 20, \ panel 27, \ panel 37, \ panel 58, \ panel 72, \ panel \ 113; worn inside mail, panel 55; carried to ships, panels 88 - 89; \ decapitation by, panel 166; loose or broken in the \ borders, panel 149, panels 151 - \ 152, panel 155, panel 160, \ panels \ 166 - 167, panel 173; scavengers collecting, \ panel \ 168.
'; details["Women"]={"ref":"Women","html":"", "gif":"1", "caption":"Women"}; details["Women"].html='Women in the Bayeux Tapestry
\With the exception of the famous figure of Ælfgyva, \ there has been virtually no discussion of the significance of women \ in the Bayeux Tapestry. This is perhaps not that surprising given \ the overwhelming masculinist character of the document: out of \ approximately 1,500 figures found in the Tapestry, some 620 are \ men, while only five, maybe six, are women; only three of these \ figures appear in the central narrative, and only one is named. For \ a more general discussion of women in the early post-Conquest \ period, see Stafford (1994, 48-51, \ 221-249).
\A few critics do read the presence of women in the \ Tapestry specifically from the perspective of gender. Bolduc \ (1994, 18-22) focuses on the disruptive power of women found in the \ margins of the Tapestry; Bond (1995, 21ff.) considers how the \ representation of women in the textile transcends a political \ history to a cultural, gendered reading of the genetic and generic \ "subplot that served to figure noblewomen within official culture \ predominantly in their capacity to engender \'lines\' of heredity and \ power known to the secular world as lineage"; less effectively, \ Caviness (1998) argues that the obvious \ absence of women in the Tapestry "allows a reconfiguration of \ gender, so that the long-haired Anglo-Saxons, especially Harold, \ are constructed as a feminized \'other\' or the enemy"; while \ Stafford (1997, 48-51, 275) briefly \ studies the representation of Queen \ Edith at Edward\'s deathbed (see below).
\Of the women in the central narrative, Ælfgyva in panel 39 has \ received the most scholarly notice, though almost all discussion \ centers around either surely identifying this figure as an \ historical personage, or on assessing the significance of this \ woman to the royal or marital plans of William and/or Harold. The \ scene, however, may be sexually charged, and Bolduc \ (1994, 19) views the scene between the cleric and Ælfgyva as \ a possible rape or adultery, where a man "enter[s] into a dangerous \ woman\'s domain." Bond (1995, 21ff.) and Caviness \ (1998) both focus on Ælfgyva in arguing for a gendered \ reading of the Tapestry (see above). See panel 39 for a \ full treatment of this figure.
\Queen Edith, the sister of Harold and wife of King Edward the \ Confessor, also appears in the Tapestry at her \ husband\'s deathbed (panel 70), but has been traditionally \ overshadowed by the event of the king\'s passing. However, as \ Stafford (1997, 48-51, 275) notes, the \ representation of the deathbed scene is likely modeled on the \ anonymous Vita Ædwardi (Library: Vita (¶3)) commissioned \ by Edith herself. As such, Stafford argues that the Tapestry here \ also reveals the queen\'s own struggle to retain power and influence \ after the death of her husband. Lewis (1999, 108) also notes how this \ scene emphasizes Edith\'s place in the current transition of royal \ power and believes that Edith points to her brother, "stressing his \ indirect blood tie to the king."
\Several critics have commented on the plight and status of \ the woman and child found in front of the burning building in \ panel \ 118, though mostly for either the purposes of the woman\'s \ costuming, or in discussing whether the scene evinces a Norman \ "scorched earth policy." Gibbs-Smith (1957, \ 172) and Parisse (1983, 113) both comment on the \ aristocratic quality of the figures\' vestments. Nevinson \ (1957, 74) observes that this woman "wears a kerchief wound tightly \ around her head and neck and tucked into the rounded top of her \ dress, [which] is coloured brown and fits the body fairly tightly \ except for the sleeves which end in long hanging cuffs lined with \ blue." Nevinson goes on to note that sleeves of this type are \ unusual before the twelfth century. Bolduc \ (1994, 19) notes similarities in the framing of this woman and that \ of Ælfgyva in panel 39. Bolduc further argues that \ the fact that the woman remains fully clothed and has escaped the \ fire does not therefore "undercut the glorious nature of William\'s \ invasion." Fowke (1898, 113) reads the scene as \ showing the woman and child fleeing the building, and therefore \ implying that the Normans did not even empty the building first. \ Wilson (1985, 188) takes the idea one \ step further and hazards that the women and child may be caught \ inside the burning building. Stenton (1957, 21) considers this scene \ as primary evidence that the artist of the Tapestry "was sensitive \ to the waste and cruelty of war."
\Two, possibly three, representations of women occur in the \ borders to the Tapestry (though Bolduc \ (1994, 20, n. 12) counts the centaurs in the upper margins of \ panel 25 \ as a fourth instance). Bolduc (20-21) contains the only \ comprehensive (though brief) study of women in the borders, which \ she notes are without exception naked, well on their way to sexual \ relations (whether desired or not), with literally nothing left to \ protect them from men\'s advances. For Bolduc, the Tapestry "depicts \ women as sexual beings, perpetually objects of men\'s desire," who \ "destabilize" the action in the central narrative, "prefigure" the \ incipient military action, and "remind the viewer graphically that \ war is not always as glorious as the central panel might \ intimate."
\In the lower border of panel 30, where Guy \ hands Harold over to William, a naked man stretches out his hands \ to an equally unclothed women, who has placed one hand on her head \ and one over her privates. Herrmann (1964, 8) argues that the \ lower border represents the Aesopic fable "The Maiden and her \ Suitors." McNulty (1989, 37) describes the scene \ as "an impending rape," and matches the anticipated degradation to \ that which William will later in the narrative do to Harold. He \ also compares this scene to a similar one in panel 123 (see \ below). Bolduc (1994, 20) interprets the woman \ as clearly defenseless, but attempting to cover herself. Lewis (1999, \ 81) also considers the scene as one of rape, but notes the \ alignment of Harold above to the male border figure and concludes \ that the episode indexes Harold\'s hidden character of \ raptor, a quality also signalled by the hawk he carries \ above.
\In panel 123, where the Norman cavalry \ begins to ride towards battle, the upper border displays a naked \ women with her arms outstretched to a man who carries an axe and a \ pouch. Though Grape (1994, 145) considers the naked \ couple here and in the next "oblivious to the impending drama," \ other scholars believe that the scene comments on the central \ action unfolding below. Fowke (1898, 116) views these two \ couples as representative of the haste with which the English were \ called to readiness. Rud (1996, 76) writes that the figures \ here show a "hastily mobilized English warrior whose wife has \ brought him his arms," and then relates that the following couple \ shows "a last fond embrace." Herrmann (1964, 11) identifies the \ scene in the upper border as a scene from the Aesopic fable "The \ Widow and the Soldier," where "the consoled widow holds her arms \ towards the Roman soldier who holds an axe and a purse." McNulty \ (1989, 38) associates this scene and a similar one in the lower \ border of panel 30 and argues that in both of \ them, the "defenseless, naked woman" represents Harold\'s \ beholdeness to William. Bolduc (1994, 20) also compares this \ scene to the border figures in the next panel and in panel 30 (see \ above), and considers the bag the man holds as perhaps being the \ spoils of war. For Bolduc, the reverse motion of the man could \ amount to a "visual promise" of William to his men about their \ future.
\In the upper border of the following panel (panel 124), a \ second naked couple face each other with outstretched arms, though \ it is less assured that one of these figures is a woman. Herrmann \ (1964, 11) identifies the couple in the upper border as an erotic \ episode from the Aesopic fable of "The Young Man and the \ Courtesan." Bolduc (1994, 20) also compares this \ scene to the border figures in the previous panel and in panel 30. Bolduc \ interprets the figure on the right as female "only through absence, \ since she lacks the testicles that hang down from her male partner \ in the scene." She also equates the aggressive stance of the man \ towards the woman as a metaphorical warning of impending violence \ to Harold and his men.
\Index: women in the Tapestry: Ælfgyva, panel 39; Edith \ panel 70; \ woman of the burning house, panel 118; women in the borders: \ panel 30, \ panel \ 124, panel 125, female centaurs, panel 25.
'; var glossarydefault='Please select an entry by clicking on the list on the right. \ Choose a different glossary category from the buttons below the \ list.
\If you are in the "Places" section of the Glossary, you may \ click on the thumbnail map shown with each entry to display a map \ of the entire region. Click on this map to close it.
\If you have opened the entry for the "Battle of Hastings" in the \ "Events" section, you may click on the thumbnail map shown to \ display a map of the battlefield. Click on this map to close \ it.
'; var genealogy = new Array (); genealogy["Aethlrd2"]={"html":"", "caption":"Æthelred"}; genealogy["Aethlrd2"].html='Æthelred II, King of England
\Æthelred II, the youngest son of King Edgar, became king \ of England in 978, when he was about the age of 13. The \ circumstances of his accession are troubled; his older brother \ Edward was murdered after a three-year reign, most likely by \ supporters of the young Æthelred. Æthelred\'s reign, \ though long, was beset with many problems, and he is now generally \ regarded to have been a weak and indecisive leader He was also \ known as Æthelred Unræd ("the Unready"), a play \ on his own name meaning "Æthelred the Uncounseled." Viking \ raids plagued southern England throughout his rule, with almost \ yearly tributes being paid to Danish leaders. After almost three \ decades of constant harrying, Æthelred died of illness in \ 1016 during yet another invasion; following the untimely death of \ his son, Edmund Ironside, England fell to the Danish king Cnut by \ the end of the year.
\However, in 1002, Æthelred married his second wife \ Emma-Ælgifu, the sister of \ Duke Richard \ II of Normandy (William the Conqueror\'s grandfather). This \ marriage may be understood as the genesis of the Norman claim to \ the English throne, tenuous though it might be (see Glossary: Claims to \ the English Throne). Through it, William was able to \ trace a legitimate bloodline to England\'s royalty. Perhaps more \ importantly, Æthelred\'s ties to Normandy insured that his and \ Emma\'s sons, Alfred and Edward (later King Edward the \ Confessor), were safely exiled and educated there after Cnut came \ to power in 1016. This safety in turn may have instilled pro-Norman \ sympathies in Edward.
\Cf. Hill (1978); Stenton (1971, \ 372-393).
'; genealogy["Edith"]={"html":"", "caption":"Edith"}; genealogy["Edith"].html='Edith, Queen of England
\The eldest sister of Harold, and perhaps the eldest child \ of the Godwin family, Edith was educated at Wilton Abbey and \ married King \ Edward in 1045. As the queen of England, she no doubt \ helped advance her brothers\' positions, and by 1065 she was the \ third wealthiest person in England, behind only her husband and her \ brother Harold.
\However, Edith and Edward never produced an heir to the English \ throne, and some scholars have speculated that by 1050 Edward, now \ secure in his power and no longer reliant upon the Godwin family, \ wished to push Earl Godwin from power and divorce \ Edith to marry anew (Cf. Walker (1997, 27)). However, Godwin did \ not fall from power, and Edward and Edith remained married despite \ the lack of an heir until Edward\'s death in 1065.
\Though she is not named in the scene, Edith most likely appears \ at the foot of Edward\'s deathbed in panel 70 of the Tapestry, a scene \ likely modeled on the description of Edward\'s death presented in \ the anonymous Vita Ædwardi, which Edith commissioned \ (Library: Vita \ Edwardi (¶3)).
\After the Conquest, Queen Edith, perhaps because of her marriage \ to Edward, was not forced into exile, but rather spent the rest of \ her life at her lands in Winchester and Wilton, uninvolved in any \ of the subsequent English rebellions. Edith died in 1075.
\See also DeVries (1999, 117-122) and \ Stafford \ (1997, 255-279).
\Index: Edith, at Edward\'s deathbed, panel 70.
'; genealogy["Edward"]={"html":"", "caption":"Edward"}; genealogy["Edward"].html='Edward the Confessor, King of England \ (Eadwardus)
\King and Saint Edward the Confessor was born between 1002 \ and 1005 and died on Jan. 5, 1066. He was the next to last \ Anglo-Saxon king of England. His reign (1042-66) also prepared the \ way for the Normanization of England under William the Conqueror. \ During his reign, Edward did much to allow Norman culture to enter \ Anglo-Saxon England, including rebuilding Westminster \ Abbey as the first example of Norman Architecture on \ the island.
\The son of King Æthelred II and \ Emma-Ælgifu, Edward was raised at \ the ducal court of Normandy and during his twenty-five year exile \ there developed pro-Norman sympathies. See the Genealogy entry for \ Emma-Ælfgifu for more background to the political situation \ of Edward\'s childhood. The Vita Ædwardi describes \ Edward in the same stereotypical fashion shown in the Tapestry: "he \ was a very proper figure of a man -- of outstanding height, and \ distinguished by his milky white hair and beard, full face and rosy \ cheeks, thin white hands and long translucent fingers" (Barlow \ (1992, 19)).
\Brown (1977, 140-141) views the \ Tapestry\'s depiction of Edward as "based upon the hagiographical \ image of the king, rather than upon a knowledge of the sovereign \ who had actually been vigorous in life, who had enjoyed hunting \ during his last year, and who had unexpectedly become ill and \ dies." Barlow, cited in Wilson (1985, 15-16), notes that Edward \ the saint and Edward the friend of Normandy are essentially both \ the creation of post-Conquest Norman propaganda.Without the \ pro-Norman climate, Barlow argues, Edward would have been largely \ forgotten. Likewise Keynes (1991, 173) notes the tendency \ of Anglo-Norman rulers to bolster their rule through affirmation of \ respect for "the laws of King Edward."
\The most complete discussion of King Edward and his life remains \ Barlow (1979).
\Index: Edward the Confessor, with Harold, panel 1, panel 65, \ Museum: King \ Edward\'s Seal; death of, panels 68-70.
'; genealogy["Emma"]={"html":"", "caption":"Emma"}; genealogy["Emma"].html='Emma/Ælfgifu \
Emma, the daughter of Duke Richard I of Normandy, was \ born ca. 985-990 and in 1002 was married to King Æthelred \ II of England, taking the English aristocratic name \ Ælfgifu. In this marriage she bore Æthelred two sons, \ Alfred and Edward, and a daughter, Godgifu . Following \ Æthelred\'s death and the fall of England to the Danish king \ Cnut in 1016, Emma\'s children went into exile in Normandy and she \ married, or likely was forced to marry, the new Danish \ ruler.
\In 1035 Cnut died, and Emma supported her son by Cnut, \ Hardecnut, against Harold Harefoot, Cnut\'s earlier son by \ Ælfgifu of Northhampton. During this contest, Emma\'s earlier \ sons, Alfred and Edward, returned from Normandy as additional \ claimants to the throne. Alfred, however, was captured and killed, \ while Edward, who had met with his mother, returned to Normandy. \ When Harefoot took the throne, Emma was driven into exile in \ Flanders. Upon Harefoot\'s death in 1040, Emma returned to England \ and her son Hardecnut came to the throne, only to die two years \ later. Her son Edward then returned from Normandy to become king, \ but within a year had moved against Emma and deprived her of much \ of her lands and power. Though she was allowed to return to court \ in 1044, she remained largely powerless until her death in \ 1052.
\Emma is a key figure in the Norman conquest; through her is \ established Norman blood in the English crown, and because of her \ marriage to Æthelred, King Edward spent the twenty-five years \ of his life in Normandy. It is through Emma that William was able \ to legitimate his claim to the English throne, and it is possible \ that the Tapestry alludes to her in the figure of the mysterious \ Ælfgyva in panel 39.
\Cf. Stafford (1997, 209-254). For a full \ discussion of Emma\'s political situation in regards to William and \ her possible representation in the Tapestry, see Freeman \ (1991, 119-120, 133-134).
'; genealogy["Eustace"]={"html":"", "caption":"Eustace"}; genealogy["Eustace"].html='Eustace, Count of Boulogne (Eustatius \ (?))
\Count Eustace of Boulogne was brother-in-law to King \ Edward and an important contributor to the Norman victory at \ Hastings. Eustace is mentioned by several contemporary or near \ contemporary reports of the battle, including Carmen de \ Hastingae Proelio (Library: Carmen (¶29 ff.)), \ William of Poitiers (Library: Poitiers (¶44)), and the \ Chronicle of Battle Abbey (Library: Battle Abbey (¶5)), and \ is probably (though not definitely) shown in panel 161 of the \ Tapestry.
\Several scholars have pointed out Eustace\'s prior \ involvement with English affairs. Thorpe \ (1973, 13) follows the entry for 1051 in the D and E versions of \ the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (see Whitelock (1986, 117-122)) which \ records an incident in which Eustace and his troops, while visiting \ King Edward, come into conflict with local officials at Dover. \ Subsequently, Edward ordered Earl Godwin, Harold\'s father, to \ punish the English involved. Godwin, however, refused, \ precipitating the brief exile of the Godwin family. See Douglas \ (1964, 168-69) for a full account of this matter and its political \ implications.
\William of Poitiers (see Chibnall (1998, 182-185)) reports that \ in 1067 Eustace attempted and quickly aborted an invasion of \ England at Dover. In relation to this, Morton and \ Muntz (1972, xxii-xxiii) note that Eustace was \ married to Godgifu, daughter of Emma-Ælfgifu \ and King \ Æthelred, and may have considered himself a \ legitimate heir to the throne. However, see Barlow (1979, 307-308) \ for a contrary argument that Eustace brought with him a pretender \ to the throne.
\Brown (1977, 29, 145-146) observes that \ Poitiers shows Eustace in a less than favorable light at Hastings, \ perhaps foreshadowing the count\'s subsequent and treacherous \ invasion at Dover. She also suggests that the Tapestry invokes a \ "political typology" which attempts to refute such depictions and \ to establish Eustace as a heroic figure forgiven for his later \ crimes. Bachrach (1987, 18) suggests that \ Bishop Odo \ included Eustace in the Tapestry because he considered him part of \ an important factio in post-Conquest political struggles. \ Bridgeford (1999, 161 ff.) presents a \ detailed account of Eustace\'s political activities and their \ relation to the Bayeux Tapestry, and pre- and post-Conquest events. \ He especially notes that Dover Castle was Odo\'s castle, and \ contends that Eustace created the Tapestry for Odo as a form \ of reconciliation for the attack and possibly to secure the release \ of one or more of his relatives captured during the conflict. The \ favorable depiction of Eustace in the Tapestry has also served as a \ basis for a terminus post quo for dating the work as well \ (see Introduction: \ Dating). See also the discussion of the probable \ representation of Eustace in panel 161.
\For a complete review of Eustace\'s life, see Tanner \ (1992, 251-86).
\Index: Eustace, at Hastings(?), rallying his own \ Franco-Flemish line(?) panel 161.
'; genealogy["Godgifu"]={"html":"", "caption":"Godgify"}; genealogy["Godgifu"].html='Godgifu
\Godgifu, the sister of King Edward the Confessor, was likely \ born c. 1007 (see Stafford (1997, 221)) to Emma and Æthelred \ II. After Æthelred\'s death and the fall of England to \ the Danes in 1016, Godgifu lived in exile in Normandy with her \ brothers, Edward and Alfred. Godgifu was apparently married as soon \ as possible to Drogo, count of Mantes (see Keynes (1991, \ 185-186)). Drogo, however died in 1035 and Godgifu remarried to \ Eustace of \ Boulogne in the following \ year.
\Because of this marriage, Eustace may have had designs on the \ English throne, though such a claim would have been tenuous in the \ extreme. Eustace did invade England in 1067, but see Barlow (1979, 307-308) \ for a contrary argument that Eustace brought with him a pretender \ to the throne.
\See Barlow (1979, 307-308); Keynes (1991, \ 185-186); Stafford (1997, 221, \ 243).
'; genealogy["Godwin"]={"html":"", "caption":"Godwin"}; genealogy["Godwin"].html='Godwin, Earl of Essex \
Godwin was earl of Wessex and father of Harold Godwinson, \ earl of Wessex and king of England, Edith, King Edward\'s queen, and Swein, \ Gyrth, \ Leofwine and Tostig, earls of most \ of England at one time or another.
\Godwin was the son of Wulfnoth, a Sussex fleet commander who in \ 1008 was accused of treason, perhaps unfairly, and subsequently \ mutinied with twenty ships and raided the southern coast, and \ destroyed eighty more of the English fleet in response. Wulfnoth \ was exiled and died c.1014.
\His son appears to have been successful at salvaging his \ family\'s fortune under King Æthelred\'s son\'s \ Athelstan and Edmund. Unlike many other Anglo-Saxon nobles, Godwin \ managed to prosper under the Danish rule of Cnut which began in \ 1016. By 1023, Godwin had become earl of all Wessex and married \ Cnut\'s sister-in-law Gytha. In 1035, he survived another political \ crisis when Cnut died and a struggle for the throne ensued. Godwin \ supported Hardecnut, the king\'s son by Emma-Ælgifu of \ Normandy, against Harold Harefoot, his son by Ælfgifu of \ Northampton. However, as Harold Harefoot appeared to have the upper \ hand in the race to the throne, Godwin was forced again to switch \ allegiance, this time by playing a major role in the arrest and \ murder of Alfred, Emma\'s son by Æthelred, who had returned \ from Normandy with his brother Edward to England in 1036 to contest \ Harefoot\'s rule. As Alfred\'s brother Edward later became king of \ England himself, Godwin\'s actions established a longstanding emnity \ between his family and the Norman-raised Edward, who came to power \ in 1042.
\Early in his rule Edward needed the powerful Godwin to insure \ control; he even married the earl\'s daughter Edith as his queen. \ But by 1051 the king was able to force Godwin and most of his \ family into exile. The Godwins were restored to power in the fall \ of 1052, but Godwin died shortly thereafter, on April 15, 1053 and \ was succeeded in power by his son Harold.
\Cf. Campbell (1978, 17-33); DeVries (1999, \ 69-108); Raraty (1989, 3-19); Walker (1997, \ 1-53).
'; genealogy["Gyrth"]={"html":"", "caption":"Gyrth"}; genealogy["Gyrth"].html='Gyrth (Gyrð)
\A younger brother of Harold Godwinson, Gyrth was born \ c. 1032 (Barlow (1992, 8, n.10)), and became earl \ of East Anglia c. 1057. Little else is known about Gyrth \ before 1066, other than that he accompanied his father to Bruges \ during the Godwins\' brief exile in 1051-1052, and that he returned \ there in 1061, while escorting his brother Tostig on a trip to \ Rome. Given the silence of the literary sources, it is assumed that \ both he and his brother Leofwine supported King Edward\'s \ exile of their brother Tostig, and their other brother Harold\'s \ quest for kingship.
\Most literature of the Conquest notes Gyrth\'s death at Hastings, \ as does the Tapestry at panel 151. Some sources embellish \ Gyrth\'s role, depicting him in personal battle with William \ (e.g. Library: \ Carmen de Hastingae Proelio (¶26)); late \ sources show him alternately arguing with brother Harold and \ providing him with caution and courage before the battle \ (e.g. Library: \ Wace (¶75 ff.) and then Wace (¶119 \ ff.)). Barlow (2002, 99) notes the late and \ untrustworthy source of De Inventione Sanctae Crucis places \ Gyrth at the Battle of Stamford Bridge as well. \ Barlow (112) further notes that after Hastings no church claimed \ his body, and if unmarried, he was likely left to rot.
\Cf. DeVries (1999, 114-115).
\Index: Gyrth, death of, panel 151.
'; genealogy["Harold2"]={"html":"", "caption":"Harold"}; genealogy["Harold2"].html='Harold II, Earl of Wessex, King of England \ (Harold)
\The last Anglo-Saxon king of England, Harold was born \ c.1022, and was defeated and killed in 1066 at the Battle of \ Hastings by the Normans under William the Conqueror. Harold \ succeeded his father Godwin in 1053 to the powerful \ earldom of Wessex and succeeded to the throne on King Edward\'s \ death in January,1066.
\Maclagan (1949, 7) suggests that the \ Tapestry portrays Harold "not as a Judas . . . though perhaps as a \ Macbeth; a brave man led by ambition into disloyalty." In a similar \ fashion, Bernstein (1986, 122-123) reads \ Harold\'s depiction in the Tapestry sympathetically, as sees him as \ a tragic, not contemptible figure, a heroic man caught between \ conflicted loyalties. Loyn (1966, 4) notes that the Tapestry \ is the only contemporary source which shows Harold as a combination \ of virtue and vice and that "the English sources generally idealize \ him, while the Norman sources generally vilify him." Cowdrey \ (1997, 96-97) notes that Harold\'s name appears in the Tapestry \ twenty-three times, compared to William\'s name, which appears \ seventeen times. He also (98 ff.) argues that the central narrative \ of the Tapestry depicts Harold as a chevalier sans peur et sans \ reproche while the fables hint at his treachery, and later \ (108-09) contends that as after the Conquest the Normans depended \ in part on Anglo-Saxons for military service, it is not \ inconceivable that the Tapestry was also designed to honor a heroic \ memory of Harold.
\Loyn (1966) is a detailed introduction \ to the life and person of Harold Godwinson, though it has recently \ been superceded by the lengthier Walker \ (1997) and Barlow (2002, 51-111).
\Index: Harold Godwinson, with Edward, panel 1, panel 64; in \ Bosham, panels 2-4, panel 5; sea \ voyage to Normandy of, panels 9-12, Glossary: Harold\'s \ Mission to Normandy; captured by Guy, panel 13, \ panel 18, \ panel 20, \ panel 30; \ with William, panel 35, panel 37; with \ William in Brittany, panel 43(?), panel 45; in \ arms-giving scene, panel 55; swears oath to William, \ panel 59; \ travels to London, panel 63; at Edward\'s deathbed, \ panel 70; \ crowned king, panel 72; under Halley\'s comet, \ panel 75; \ receives news of William\'s army at Hastings, panel 132; death \ of, panel 169, Glossary: Death of \ Harold.
'; genealogy["Herleve"]={"html":"", "caption":"Herleve"}; genealogy["Herleve"].html='Herleve
\The origins of William the Conqueror\'s mother, Herleve, known \ sometimes as Arlette, remain obscure; as Bates (2001, 33) notes, \ only one mention of her exists before 1100, probably as a result of \ William\'s eleventh-century biographers\' desire to conceal his \ illegitimate origins. She is thought to have been the daughter of a \ tanner, or perhaps an undertaker, in the village of Falaise. She \ and Duke \ Robert had William out of wedlock, c. 1028. Shortly \ thereafter, Herleve was married to Herluin, vicomte of \ Conteville, for whom she had two sons: Odo, later bishop of \ Bayeux, earl of Kent, and patron of the Tapestry, and Robert , later \ count of Mortain, and also featured in the Tapestry. Herleve is \ thought to have died soon after 1050, and was buried at Grestain, \ in an abbey her husband \ founded.
\Cf. Douglas (1964, 379-382) and \ Bates \ (2001, 33-35).
'; genealogy["Herluin"]={"html":"", "caption":"Herluin"}; genealogy["Herluin"].html='Herluin \
Herluin married Herleve, the mother of William the \ Conqueror by Duke Robert, shortly after William\'s \ birth in c.1028. He soon after was made vicomte of \ Conteville, suggesting that by this time he was an established \ supporter of Robert. In his marriage to Herleve, Herluin had two \ sons, half brothers to William: Odo, later bishop of Bayeux, earl of \ Kent, and patron of the Tapestry, and Robert, later \ count of Mortain, and also featured in the Tapestry. Herluin is \ thought to have died c. \ 1066.
\Cf. Douglas (1964, 379-82) and Golding (1991, \ 119-121 and n.11).
'; genealogy["Leofwine"]={"html":"", "caption":"Leofwine"}; genealogy["Leofwine"].html='Leofwine (Lewine)
\The second youngest brother of Harold Godwinson, \ Leofwine was born c. 1035 (Barlow (1992, 8, n.10)) and became earl \ of the East Midlands ca. 1057-1058. Little else is known \ about Leofwine before 1066, other than that he accompanied his \ brother Harold to Ireland during the Godwins\' brief exile in \ 1051-1052. Given the silence of the literary sources, it is assumed \ that both he and his brother Gyrth supported King Edward\'s exile of \ their brother Tostig, and their brother Harold\'s quest for \ kingship. Barlow (2002, 99) conjectures that \ during 1066 Leofwine may have commanded the Anglo-saxon fleet, \ though this is purely speculative. Many accounts of the Conquest \ note Leofwine\'s death at Hastings, as does the Tapestry -- for a \ full discussion, see panel 150. Barlow2002 (2002, 112) \ notes that after Hastings no church claimed his body, and if \ unmarried, he was likely left to \ rot.
\Cf. DeVries (1999, 114-115); Walker (1997, \ 196-197).
\Index: Leofwine, death of, panel 150.
'; genealogy["Odo"]={"html":"", "caption":"Odo"}; genealogy["Odo"].html='Odo, Bishop of Bayeux , Earl of Kent \ (Odo)
\Odo was the uterine brother of William, a long-term bishop \ of Bayeux, a holder of extensive lands in both Normandy and \ southern England, and the probable patron of the Tapestry. Brown (1977, \ 126) argues he must have been born to William\'s lower-class mother \ Herleve and Herluin around \ 1030, and became bishop at a very early age, ca. 1049, when \ he was well under the canonical age of thirty. Bates (1975, \ 2) locates his birth either soon after 1030 or soon after 1035; \ Bernstein (1986, 31) chooses the latter \ and places Odo\'s age, amazingly, at 13 when he receives the \ bishopric of Bayeux.
\In Normandy, Odo was a prominent leader in the ongoing \ ecclesiastical reforms, including the rebuilding of Bayeux \ Cathedral, consecrated in 1077, and the establishment of a \ prominent monastic school (cf. Douglas \ (1964, 119-132)). According to William\'s Ship List (Library: Ship List of William \ the Conqueror (¶2)), Odo contributed 100 ships \ to the invasion fleet, second only to his brother Robert of Mortain \ (cf. Hollister (1987, 222 ff., 243)). After \ the Conquest, Odo inherited much of the Godwin and \ Godwinson lands (Cf. Bates (1975, 9), served William in a \ secular capacity as well, becoming the earl of Kent, and often \ acted as judicar and viceroy for the king when William was out of \ the country. Based on Domesday evidence, Hollister (1987, 220-222, 242) ranks \ Odo the largest tenant-in-chief in post-Conquest England, with \ properties in seventeen shires, amounting to £3200 \ personally, with an additional £3200 in demesne and \ enfeoffment. In 1082 Odo was arrested and imprisoned by William, \ presumably for having designs on purchasing the Papacy and \ recruiting knights who should be in the king\'s service to the Isle \ of Wight for an expedition to Italy. In 1087 Odo was released, with \ his brother Count Robert of Mortain\'s intervention, by William\'s \ deathbed decree, and returned in a state of exile to Normandy, \ where by early 1088 he began to support Robert \ Curthose\'s claims for succession against William Rufus. By the end \ of the year, Odo had lost all his lands in England. The last eight \ years of his life were spent restoring his see at Bayeux and \ supporting the cause of the first Crusade. Odo died in early 1097 \ in Palermo, while on the first Crusade to the Holy Land. Orderic \ Vitalis summarizes Odo\'s post-Conquest authority:
\What shall I say of Odo, bishop of Bayeux, \ who was an earl palatine dreaded by Englishmen everywhere, and able \ to dispense justice like a second king? He had authority greater \ than all earls and other magnates in the kingdom, and gained much \ ancient treasure as well as holding Kent (Chibnall (1968, \ 264-265)).
\Scholars generally agree that Odo is the patron of the \ Tapestry, based on his multiple appearances in the textile and the \ fact that he was a major presence in both Kent and Bayeux, the two \ locales frequently associated with the piece. Additionally, as \ Werckmeister (1976, 582) and many \ others point out, three other personages in the Tapestry, Wadard \ (Glossary: \ Wadard), Vital (Glossary: Vital) and Turold \ (Glossary: \ Turold), were also probably vassals of Odo. Lewis (1999, \ 116-130) explores in detail how the second half of the Tapestry \ foregrounds Odo\'s rise to power in England as wealthy landowner, \ the inheritor of Harold\'s lands, and earl of Kent. For other \ discussions of Odo\'s presence in the Tapestry, and his patronage of \ the work, see Werckmeister (1976, 579-589), Brown (1977, \ 126-130), Bernstein (1986, 30-36, 136-143), \ Legge (1987, 84-85), Brown (1990, \ 28), Grape (1994, 54) and Gameson \ (1997, 176-181). See also panel 158 and Museum: Odo\'s \ Seal for a discussion of the bishop\'s secular \ side.
\Bates (1975) contains a \ comprehensive discussion of Odo\'s secular and religious activities, \ possessions and political troubles, and remains the authoritative \ treatment of this figure. See also Bates (2001, 125-127).
\Index: Odo of Bayeux, presides over dinner at \ Hastings, panel 112; with Robert and William, \ panel \ 113; rallies troops at Hastings panel 158; ordering construction of the \ invasion fleet(?), panel 80; riding with William at \ Hastings(?) panel 127; see also Museum: Odo\'s \ Seal.
'; genealogy["Richard1"]={"html":"", "caption":"Richard I"}; genealogy["Richard1"].html='Richard I of Normandy \
Richard was count of Rouen and leader of the Normans from \ 943 to 996, and grandson of Rollo, the founder of the Norman state. \ Importantly, in 991 Richard negotiated a non-aggression treaty with \ King \ Æthelred II of England, which may have paved the way \ for the eventual marriage of his daughter Emma to \ Æthelred in 1002, a marriage which connected the English and \ Norman ruling houses through blood ties.
\Cf. Stafford (1997, 209-216).
'; genealogy["Richard2"]={"html":"", "caption":"Richard II"}; genealogy["Richard2"].html='Richard II, Duke of Normandy
\Richard was the first titled duke of the Normans, and ruled from \ 996-1026. During his reign, Richard substantially consolidated and \ expanded the power of the Norman state. No doubt the marriage of \ his sister Emma to King Æthelred II of England \ in 1002 was a part of this program. Importantly, Richard also \ welcomed Emma\'s exiled children, including Edward, to Normandy \ in 1016 after Æthelred\'s death and the fall of England to the \ Danish king Cnut. Bates (2001, 19) notes Richard was also \ the last Norman ruler to maintain relations with the Scandinavian \ areas from which the Normans descended.
\Cf. Douglas (1964, 160-162).
'; genealogy["Robert1"]={"html":"", "caption":"Robert I"}; genealogy["Robert1"].html='Robert I, Duke of Normandy
\Robert was duke of Normandy, ruled from 1027-103,5 and was the \ father of William the Conqueror. Robert was not the direct \ successor of his father, Richard, and it is thought that he may \ have killed his brother Richard III soon after the latter became \ duke. Bates \ (2001, 35-6) considers Robert\'s rule an unsettling time for \ Normandy, and briefly surveys the many problems he \ faced.
\During his reign, Robert allowed Alfred and Edward, the exiled \ English sons of Emma and King Æthelred II to remain in \ Normandy, and perhaps even helped them plan an invasion of England \ (see Douglas (1964, 163)), and a skeptical \ view from Bates (2001, 36). In 1034 Robert set out \ on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and died en route the \ following year, leaving William, his illegitimate son of about \ seven years of age, the shaky inheritance of a \ minority.
\Cf. Douglas (1964, 31-37) and Bates (2001, \ 33-36).
'; genealogy["Robertm"]={"html":"", "caption":"Robert of Mortain"}; genealogy["Robertm"].html='Robert, Count of Mortain (Rodbert)
\Robert was the uterine brother of William and full brother \ of Odo of \ Bayeux. He was born c. 1030 to Herleve, William\'s \ mother and Herluin, vicomte of \ Conteville. In 1055 the growing power of Duke William was enough \ for him to remove William Wernlenc as the count of Mortain and \ replace him with Robert, his half-brother. Mortain, in the \ southwest of Normandy, was a particularly important county for \ William; it bordered on Brittany, Maine and Bellême. Bachrach \ (1986, 14, 16) supposes that William may have given Robert some of \ the administrative duties of maintaining the pre-invasion camps at \ Dives-sur-mer and St. \ Valery.
\Most chronicles of the Conquest note Robert\'s involvement in the \ invasion and battle at Hastings. According to William\'s Ship \ List (Library: \ Ship List of William the Conqueror), Robert \ contributed 120 ships to the invasion fleet, the most of any Norman \ noble (see Hollister (1987, 222 ff., 243)). The \ Tapestry explicitly depicts Robert in panel 113 at a \ war council with his brothers Odo and William, while it has been \ suggested that Robert is shown, but not named, in panel 112, \ panel \ 116 and panel 127. Bachrach \ (1987, 18) suggests that Odo included Robert in the Tapestry \ because he considered him part of an important factio in \ post-Conquest political struggles.
\After the conquest, Robert became one of the largest landholders \ in England, and held, among other territories, the rape of Pevensey and most of Cornwall. Robert \ also extensively built up fortifications along the Sussex coast and \ helped revive Pevensey\'s economy (see Golding \ (1991, 130-134)); he may have also given land in Cornwall to the \ abbey at Mont-St-Michel ((Golding 143), also see \ panel \ 43). Based on Domesday evidence, Hollister (1987, 220-222, 242) ranks \ Robert the third largest tenant-in-chief in post-Conquest England, \ with personal properties of almost £2000 (his brother Odo is \ ranked first). William of Malmesbury, however, reports that Robert \ was stupid and dull, though this would belie the enormous \ responsibilities William had entrusted to him in both Normandy and \ England. Perhaps because of these traits, or a headstrong nature, \ or substantial time spent in Normandy, Robert appears to have \ played a comparatively minor role in the political affairs of \ England. As Golding (144) puts it, Robert was always a Norman, and \ never an Anglo-Norman. At William\'s deathbed, the count was the \ only member of William\'s close family present, and was instrumental \ in gaining his brother Odo\'s release from prison. Robert apparently \ assisted Odo in his rebellion against William Rufus, but unlike Odo \ was subsequently pardoned and had his lands restored. Robert \ outlived most of his comrades at Hastings -- he is recorded as \ witnessing a charter as late as May of 1092, and died c. \ 1095.
\ For a full biographical treatment of Robert, see Golding \ (1991). For a review of the history of the lords of Mortain, and \ the process by which Robert gained these lands, see Potts \ (1992). \Index: Robert of Mortain, with Odo and William at \ Hastings, panel 113; at feast in Hastings(?) \ panel \ 112; orders fortifications(?), panel 116; accompanies William at \ Hastings(?), panel 127.
'; genealogy["William1"]={"html":"", "caption":"William"}; genealogy["William1"].html='William I, William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy and \ King of England (Willelmi, Wilgelm)
\William was born c. 1028 and died Sept. 9, 1087. \ The illegitimate son of the Norman duke Robert I, he \ inherited Normandy in 1035, consolidating his \ rule in spite of ardent baronial opposition around 1042. He \ successfully faced further rebellions and after 1050 began to take \ an interest in acquiring land, first in Maine and Brittany, and then in England. He may \ have been promised the English throne by the English king Edward the \ Confessor (cf. Glossary: Claims to the \ English Throne). After Edward’s death, William \ invaded England and defeated King \ Harold at Hastings on October 14, 1066. On Christmas \ Day 1066, William was crowned king of England, founding the \ Anglo-Norman monarchy and realm. He died in \ 1087.
\For a thorough treatment of William\'s life and accomplishments, \ see Douglas (1964). Bates (2001) \ consolidates much from Douglas and subsequent scholarship, but does \ not provide specific citations.
\Index: William the Conqueror, hears of Harold\'s capture \ by Guy, panel 27; meets with Guy, panel 32; returns \ with Harold, panel 34; meets with Harold, panel 37; invades \ Brittany, panel 42, Glossary: William\'s \ Breton Campaign; accepts keys from Conan, panel 54; bestows \ arms on Harold, panel 55; rides to Bayeux, panel 56; \ Harold\'s oath to, panels 58-59; orders the construction \ of the invasion fleet, panel 80; approaches his fleet(?), \ panel 92; \ flagship of, panel 98; feasting at Hastings(?) \ panel \ 112; with brothers Robert and Odo, panel 113; orders fortifications built \ at Hastings(?), panel 116; receives news of Harold at \ Hastings, panel 117; prepares for battle(?) \ panel \ 120; receives scouting report from Vital, panel 127; makes \ speech to troops, panel 134; bares face to rally Normans, \ panel \ 160.
'; genealogy["Wulfnoth"]={"html":"", "caption":"Wulfnoth"}; genealogy["Wulfnoth"].html='Wulfnoth
\The youngest brother of Harold Godwinson, Wulfnoth was still \ a child when he was sent with his cousin Hakon \ (the son of Harold\'s brother Swein) to Normandy as hostages for his \ father Earl \ Godwin and his family during their troubles in 1051. Harold \ may have tried to free Wulfnoth in 1064 (see Glossary: Harold\'s \ Mission to Normandy), but apparently was \ unsuccessful. Later literary sources note that Wulfnoth returned to \ England after the Conquest, but remained a prisoner until his death \ in 1094. He was the possibly the last of Harold\'s children left \ alive.
\Cf. DeVries (1999, 196-197) and \ Barlow \ (2002, 117-118).
'; var genealogydefault='The genealogical chart is not a complete one for any of the \ families represented. Rather, it centers around the major figures \ included in the Tapestry, and their relation to each other, and \ explains the bloodlines which led to William and Harold\'s claims to \ the English throne.
\Move the cursor over any name to access a short \ biographical discussion of the figure and their relation to the \ events of the Norman Conquest and/or the Bayeux Tapestry.
'; var genealogyTable='\
 \
| ||||||
| \ | \
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\ | ||
| \ | \
| \
\
| \
\
| \
|||
| \ | \
| \
\ | \
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\
|
| \
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\
| \
\
| \
Mouse over towns and cities for background information.
\Click the right arrow to start the geographic tour of the Tapestry. Click the "Battle map" button to jump ahead to the battlefield map \ at the end of the tour. Click the "Panoramas" button to view 360 degree video panoramas of the battlefield.
'; var mapInfo2='\Click the left and right arrows to move backwards and forwards through the geographic tour of the Tapestry. Click the "Battle map" button to jump ahead to the battlefield map \ at the end of the tour. Click the "Panoramas" button to view 360 degree video panoramas of the battlefield.\ To return to the opening map and the start of the tour use the "Click Map" button.
'; var mapInfo3='To rotate the image up, down, right or left, click the picture and \ drag the mouse in the desired direction. Note: if the video is not \ fully loaded, rotation will happen more slowly.
\To zoom in on the image, hold down the SHIFT key.
\To zoom out on the image, hold down the CONTROL key.
'; var map = new Array (); map["Bayeux"]={"html":"","caption":"Bayeux"}; map["Bayeux"].html='Bayeux (Bagias):
\Bayeux was in the eleventh century one of the major \ centers in Normandy. Its bishop, Odo, was the half-brother of \ William and probable patron of the Tapestry. Today, Bayeux still \ houses the Tapestry, and has records of its possession back to 1476 \ (cf. Introduction: Location and Purpose and \ Introduction: \ Dating ).
\As a capital of Gaul, Bayeux was first known as \ Bajocasses, and then known as Augustodurum and \ Civitas Baiocasium under the Romans. Hrólfr \ (Rollo) captured the city in 880, thirty years before he officially \ conquered the Norman territory.
\Into the eleventh century, Bayeux held onto its Scandinavian \ heritage, longer than other parts of the region. In panel 59, the \ Tapestry depicts Harold swearing his oath to William at Bayeux, \ though this location is contested (see commentary in panel 59). See \ the inscription commentary in panel 57 for lexical and phonological \ studies of the term Bagias.
\Index: Bayeux, inscription of, panel 57; \
representation of, panel 58; Harold swears oath at, \
panel 59; \
Tapestry\'s display in, Introduction: Location and Purpose, Museum: Tapestry Hanging \
in Bayeux Cathedral; Odo\'s rebuilding of, Glossary: \
Odo.
\
Beaurain (Belrem):
\In the eleventh century, Beaurain was the chief town in \ the province of Ponthieu, a few miles inland on the \ river Canche and some ten miles from Montreuil. When Harold was \ captured by Guy \ of Ponthieu, he was imprisoned in Beaurain until his \ release by William (see panels 13 ff.).
\For further discussion of the representation of Beaurain \ in the Tapestry, see the commentary for panel 20 and \ panel 28. \ See Taylor (1992, passim) for a \ discussion of possible sites of the Beaurain fortifications. \ Bridgeford (1999, 175-176) notes while \ the town of Beaurain may have in Ponthieu, the castle may have lain \ in the neighboring county of St. Pol, a close ally of Eustace of \ Boulogne.
\Index: Beaurain, inscription of, panel 16; Guy and \ Harold at, panel 20; other representations of(?), \ panel 25, \ panel \ 28.
'; map["Bosham"]={"html":"","caption":"Bosham"}; map["Bosham"].html='Bosham (Bosham):
\An estate in the southeast of England on Bosham Channel \ which controlled access to the Chichester harbor, three and \ one-half miles away, Bosham was perhaps the most important and \ richest estate in Sussex. McNulty (1989, 68) records that it was \ "the equivalent of some 13,000 acres, a hundred times the endowment \ of most churches." Bosham was originally held by Earl Godwin, \ Harold\'s father, and then by Harold himself. After the conquest, \ this estate was controlled by William and Bishop Osbern of Exeter. \ Pollock (1997) advances the \ tenuous argument that the bones of King Harold may have been \ interred at Bosham church. Barlow (2002, 113) notes but refutes \ such claims.
\As Brown (1985, 17) and Wilson \ (1985, 174) observe, no extant source contemporary with the \ Tapestry mentions that Harold departed from Bosham on his mission \ to Normandy (see panels 4-7), though Freeman \ (1875, 689-90) comments that many later chronicles, including \ William of Malmesbury (Library: Malmesbury (¦2)) and \ Wace (Library: \ Wace (¦4)), do cite Bosham. The entry for \ 1051 in version E of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (see Whitelock (1986, 121)) states that \ Bosham was the point of departure for several of the Godwins exiled \ by King Edward, and Fowke (1898, 27) comments on a legend \ (from Walter Map) that Earl Godwin stole the manor from the \ Archbishop of Canterbury by asking him Da mihi Basium \ (“give me the kiss of peace”) and then reinterpreting \ Basium as “Bosham.” Barlow \ (2002, 23) reports a slightly different version of this legend. \ McNulty (1989, 68) reports that another \ Godwin, Harold\'s brother Swein, lured his cousin, earl Beorn, to \ Bosham in order to murder him. On the basis of such episodes, \ Brown (1977, 44), Brown (1985, \ 17) and McNulty have all argued that the inclusion of Bosham in the \ Tapestry implies a further degree of evil and treachery in the \ character and lineage of Harold.
\For basic background on Bosham, see also Macdermott \ (1912).
\Index: Bosham, Harold\'s journey to, panel 2; \ inscription of, panel 4; church at, panel 4, Museum: \ Bosham; feast and manor of, panels 5-6, \ Museum: \ Moissac; Harold\'s landfall at(?) panel 62.
'; map["Cantrbry"]={"html":"","caption":"Canterbury"}; map["Cantrbry"].html='Canterbury:
\Like many English cities, Canterbury was originally a \ Roman stronghold, significant because it connected three trading \ ports to London. Canterbury was also the site of Augustine\'s \ Christian mission to England in 597. In the eleventh century, \ Canterbury continued to play a dominant role in England, had two \ major monastic centers, St. Augustine\'s and Christ Church and was \ an archbishopric. After his victory at Hastings, some sources \ report Canterbury was the second city William took, after Dover \ (see, for example, Library: Poitiers \ (¦50)).
\In the post-Conquest period, Canterbury became a \ stronghold of Norman power; Odo, William\'s half-brother and bishop \ of Bayeux, became the Earl of Kent, the \ Norman Lanfranc became archbishop of Canterbury, and St. \ Augustine\'s Abbey had a succession of Norman abbots.
\It is widely held that the Bayeux Tapestry was \ manufactured at one of the monastic houses in Canterbury shortly \ after the Conquest (cf. Introduction: Origin of the \ Tapestry ).
'; map["Dinan"]={"html":"","caption":"Dinan"}; map["Dinan"].html='Dinan (Dinant):
\Dinan was a town and fortress of Brittany, situated on a height on the \ left bank of the river Rance, which feeds into the gulf at St. Malo \ (as does the Couesnon River). In the eleventh \ century, Dinan was a principal stronghold of Brittany.
\In the Tapestry, Count Conan II of Brittany might be \ shown fleeing to Dinan after a route at Dol (see \ panel 47) \ by William\'s troops. In panel 52, Conan surrenders the keys to \ Dinan, presumably ending William\'s Breton campaign. No other source \ contemporary to the Tapestry records this incident or even mentions \ Dinan. For a further discussion of the place of Dinan within the \ narrative of the Tapestry, see the commentary for panel 52 and \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign.
\Index: Dinan, attack on, panels 50-54; \ fortress of, panel 52, men of(?) panel \ 52.
'; map["Dives"]={"html":"","caption":"Dives-sur-mer"}; map["Dives"].html='Dives-sur-mer:
\Dives-sur-mer is a small fishing village on the coast of \ Normandy, situated fourteen miles from Caen at the mouth of the \ river Dives. William\'s naval fleet assembled in Dives-sur-Mer by \ early August of 1066, waited for a month, before sailing north \ along the coast to St. Valery (see Glossary: Channel \ Crossing).
\In the eleventh century, Dives was also a boat-building \ center, and it is likely that many of the scenes of shipbuilding \ and provisioning represented in panels 84-94 took place in Dives. See \ Gibbs-Smith (1957, 169) and Grape (1994, \ 129).
\Index: Dives, shipbuilding at(?), panels \ 84-94.
'; map["Dol"]={"html":"","caption":"Dol"}; map["Dol"].html='Dol (Dol):
\One of the principal cities in Brittany, Dol is situated near the \ coast and at one time, like Mont-St-Michel, \ was completely surrounded by water. Dol was also an archbishopric, \ and a highly prized citadel besieged many times throughout the \ middle ages.
\In 1064, Count Conan II of Brittany \ besieged Dol, whose lord Rivallon of \ Cambour was loyal to Norman rule. Panels 46-48 of \ the Tapestry depict the Normans attacking Dol, apparently held by \ Conan, though other reports of these events may differ than those \ shown in the Tapestry (see Glossary:William\'s \ Breton Campaign). For further details of the \ depiction and place of Dol in the Tapestry\'s narrative, see the \ commentary for panels 46-47.
\Index: Dol, attack on, panel 46; \ fortress of, panel 47; siege of, \ panel 47, \ Glossary: \ William\'s Breton Campaign.
'; map["Dover"]={"html":"","caption":"Dover"}; map["Dover"].html='Dover:
\Soon after the Germanic migration to England in the fifth \ century began, Dover, originally known as Dofras, was an \ early and major settlement in the new kingdom of Kent. By the \ eleventh century, the town was a prosperous port with its own mint \ and substantial trade to the continent. Like Hastings, Dover became one of the \ Cinque ports, an association of English maritime cities most active \ from the eleventh to the fifteenth century.
\In 1051, Dover was the site of political foment, when men \ belonging to Eustace of Boulogne, who was \ returning from a visit with King Edward, quarreled with some \ English citizens, and lives were lost on both sides. Earl Godwin , \ Harold\'s father, was ordered by Edward to punish the citizens of \ Dover, but refused, initiating a process of events that eventually \ led to the temporary exile of the Godwin family.
\Though Dover is not explicitly depicted in the Tapestry, \ scholars have considered Dover as the likely point Harold\'s return \ from Normandy in panel 62. Holmes \ (1959, 182) places this landfall at Dover, but gives no evidence or \ reasons for this location. Lewis (1999, 44) elaborates on this \ identification, noting that in William of Poitiers\' account Harold \ had sworn to William that upon Edward\'s death he would place a \ garrison of the duke\'s men in Dover Castle at his own expense \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¦4)).
\After William\'s victory at Hastings, Dover, which gave access to \ the shortest crossing to the Continent, became a key objective; \ William captured the port within two weeks of Hastings. The now \ missing end of the Tapestry could have represented the taking of \ this vital city.
\In 1067, Eustace of Boulogne returned to Dover, but this time as \ the leader of an aborted invasion attempt.
\Index: Dover, Harold lands at(?), panel 62.
'; map["Eu"]={"html":"","caption":"Eu"}; map["Eu"].html='Eu:
\Eu, a near-coastal Norman fortification on the River Bresle \ since the Roman period, became an important frontier stronghold \ under the Normans. Eu was a military hotspot during the campaigns \ of Rollo, the early tenth-century Viking founder of Normandy, and \ by William\'s time it continued to serve as a defensive position on \ the border between Normandy and Ponthieu. The heroic service of Robert, \ count of Eu, at Hastings is noted in several Norman chronicles; \ Robert is also recorded as an important contributor in the "Ship \ List of William the Conqueror" (Library: Ship List (¦1)).
\It is generally thought that the handover of Harold by Guy of \ Ponthieu to Duke William, as represented in \ panel 32, \ took place near Eu. This meeting, recorded by William of Poitiers \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¦3)), is commented upon by Douglas \ (1964, 176) and Taylor (1992, 10).
\Index: Eu, handing over of Harold at (?) panel 32.
'; map["Hastings"]={"html":"","caption":"Hastings"}; map["Hastings"].html='Hastings (Hestinga, Hestenga) and \ Battle:
\Hastings was a major port city of the Cinque ports, an \ association of English maritime cities most active from the \ eleventh to the fifteenth century. The port was also the closest \ city to William\'s landing site, and was quickly overtaken by Norman \ forces. Northwest of Hastings is the site of the 1066 battle, near \ a village now aptly named "Battle," where the Normans defeated the \ English, leading to the Norman Conquest of England. Wright \ (1996, 53) considers it likely William chose Hastings as his \ bridgehead on the advice of Normans in the area, as
\Hastings provided a geographically defensible \ position protected to some extent by the now dried up lower reaches \ of the rivers Brede and Bulverhythe on the flanks, and a beach from \ which a defended retreat could be made should the need \ arise.
\Bachrach (1986, 21-23) surveys the \ state of the Anglo-Saxon and then Norman garrisons at both Pevensey and Hastings, and provides a \ detailed assessment of William\'s occupation and expansion of the \ Roman fortifications at Hastings (see also panel 116).
\Index: Hastings, plundering of(?), panel 106, \ panel \ 118; feast at, panel 112; construction of \ fortifications of, panel 116; representation of(?) \ panel \ 119; inscriptions of, panel 104, panel 116, \ panel \ 121.
'; map["Mtstmchl"]={"html":"","caption":"Mont-Saint-Michel"}; map["Mtstmchl"].html='Mont-Saint-Michel (Monte Michaelis):
\Mont St. Michel is a 3-acre rocky islet topped by a famous \ Gothic abbey, 1.6 km (1 mi) off the northwest coast of France in \ the Bay of Mont St. Michel in the English Channel. The island, \ located 5 km (3 mi) from the shore during the middle ages, is now \ surrounded by water only two times a month. On top of it stands the \ towering Benedictine abbey of Mont St. Michel, an architectural \ masterpiece built in the thirteenth century, replacing the original \ abbey (shown in the upper border of panel 43), which was built in 966 by \ Duke Richard \ II of Normandy , but destroyed by King Philip II of France \ in 1203.
\The inclusion of Mont St. Michel in the tapestry is a bit \ incongruous; as far as other accounts relate, the abbey has nothing \ to do with William\'s Breton Campaign, other than \ perhaps as a geographic marker. See Lewis (1999, \ 89-90), however, for an argument that this site of pilgrimage may \ be viewed as a "sacred talismanic link" between Normandy and \ England, and Harold and William. For a full references of \ discussions of the monastery\'s inclusion and representation, see \ the commentary for panels 43-44.
\Index: Mont St. Michel, panel 43, William\'s relation to, \ panel 42; \ Odo\'s relation to, panel 43; representation of Abbot \ Ranulphe or Richard II in relation to(?), panel 45; \ writings at, panel 20.
'; map["Pevensey"]={"html":"","caption":"Pevensey"}; map["Pevensey"].html='Pevensey (Pevensae):
\Pevensey is a small coastal harbor and borough of Sussex, \ bounded to the east by Hastings and to the west by the region of \ Lewes. After the Conquest, the region surrounding Pevensey was \ designated one of the five rapes of Sussex and granted to Robert of \ Mortain, the brother of Odo and \ half-brother of William. At the time of the Conquest, Pevensey had \ approximately 52 burgesses, though this had doubled by the time of \ the Domesday survey (see Darby (1962, 469)). Golding \ (1991, 130-134) notes that though Pevensey suffered from the \ invasion, Robert subsequently built up fortifications along the \ Sussex coast and helped revive Pevensey\'s economy.
\The inscription in panel 98 specifically names Pevensey as \ the destination for William\'s fleet, and William of Poitiers \ (Library: \ Poitiers (¶25)) states that the fleet landed \ near Pevensey unchallenged. Poitiers and William of Jumièges \ (Library: \ Jumièges (¶6)) also report that William \ then raised fortifications at Pevensey. Panels 102-104 \ show the disembarkation of troops and horses, presumably at \ Pevensey, and Grape (1994, 135) and Gibbs-Smith (1957, 171) both comment \ that the gently sloping sand of Pevensey Bay would have made for an \ easy landfall and unloading of horses. Rudkin \ (1928, 60-63) provides a detailed assessment of the possible \ landing areas around both Pevensey and Pevensey Bay, examines \ several local traditions pertaining to the Norman landfall, and \ concludes that relatively few of William\'s fleet actually landed at \ Pevensey and that the bulk of ships made landfall across a group of \ sites around Pevensey Bay. Bachrach (1986, 21-23) surveys the \ state of the Anglo-Saxon and then Norman garrisons at both Pevensey \ and Hastings.
\Index: Pevensey, time of arrival, panel 92, \ Glossary: \ Channel Crossing; landing at, panels 102-104; \ fortifications at, panel 116; inscription of, panel 98; Robert \ of Mortain\'s holdings in, Glossary: Robert of \ Mortain.
'; map["Rennes"]={"html":"","caption":"Rennes"}; map["Rennes"].html='Rennes (Rednes):
\During most of the Middle Ages, Rennes was the chief city \ and capital of Brittany. The principal town of the \ Celtic Redones tribe, Rennes was subsequently taken by the \ Romans and by the tenth century had emerged as the capital of \ Brittany.
\In panel 49 of the Tapestry, Norman troops \ are shown attacking or passing by Rennes during William\'s Breton \ Campaign. No other Norman source includes the city, \ and as Rennes is far from the other two cities William besieges, \ Dol (in panel 47) and Dinan \ (in panel \ 52), an attack on it is considered unlikely, though some opinions \ differ. For more details of Rennes and its place in the Tapestry\'s \ narrative, see the commentary for panel 49.
\Index: Rennes, Norman approach to, panel 48; \ fortification and attack(?) of, panel 49; second battle at(?), panel \ 52.
'; map["Rouen"]={"html":"","caption":"Rouen"}; map["Rouen"].html='Rouen:
\The capital of medieval Normandy, Rouen lies on the Seine River \ about 70 miles (110 km) from Paris. The area of Rouen was first \ settled in the fifth century by Celts, and then Romans, who named \ the city Rotumagus. In the eighth century, Charlemagne \ considered Rouen one of the five principal entrances into northern \ Gaul. In 911, in response to pressure from Scandinavian invaders, \ Charles the Simple gave to Hrólfr (Rollo) and his \ Vikings the area around Rouen. From there in the course of the \ tenth century the Norman rulers extended their power over all of \ present-day Normandy. By the time of Duke William\'s rule in late \ eleventh century, Rouen was the undisputed capital of the area and \ the home of William\'s principal palace.
\Though not mentioned by name in the Tapestry, it is \ probable that the palace that Harold is brought to in panels 37-38 is \ in Rouen and possible that the stone structure in panel 28 also \ represents the city. See the commentary for these panels for \ relevant discussions.
\Index: Rouen, William at, panel 27; \ fortification of(?), panel 28; Harold and William at(?), \ panels \ 36-39; cartulary evidence of Turold at(?), panel 23; \ Harold\'s oath at(?), panel 59; William orders fleet \ construction from(?), panel 80.
'; map["StValery"]={"html":"","caption":"St. Valery sur Somme"}; map["StValery"].html='St. Valery sur Somme:
\A town on the mouth of the Somme \ River. In the eleventh century this region was a \ part of Ponthieu. Harold is believed to have \ landed near here in 1064 (see panel 13), and William is believed to \ have launched is invasion fleet from near here in 1066 (cf. \ Glossary: \ Channel Crossing).
\Index: St. Valery sur Somme, William\'s invasion \ fleet launched from (?), panel 92.
'; map["Winchstr"]={"html":"","caption":"Winchester"}; map["Winchstr"].html='Winchester:
\Winchester, a town of Roman origin that from the time of King \ Alfred in the late ninth century was considered the central seat of \ England. From the eleventh-century onward, Winchester shared this \ distinction with Westminster , which from \ the time of King Edward gradually grew in dominance. At the time of \ the conquest, Queen Edith, Edward\'s wife, held \ Winchester, and she is reported to have surrendered it to William \ without a fight (see Library: Carmen de Hastingae Proelio \ (¦34)). After his victory in England, William took care to \ be crowned in both Westminster and Winchester, and later \ commissioned monks local to Winchester to prepare the Domesday \ Book.
\Wilson (1985, 174) believes that the \ scene between Harold and Edward at the opening of the Tapestry \ takes place at Winchester (see panel 1). Most scholars, however, place \ it at Westminster. Some commentators find the artistic design of \ the Tapestry reminiscent of the "Winchester School" of illumination \ -- see panel 106 and panel 39 for \ examples.
'; map["Wstmnstr"]={"html":"","caption":"Westminster"}; map["Wstmnstr"].html='Westminster:
\Westminster Abbey, to the southwest of medieval London, \ was the principal residence of the kings of England from shortly \ before the Conquest until the early sixteenth century. By the end \ of the fourteenth century the court had its administrative, \ judicial and parliamentary headquarters at Westminster. The abbey \ at Westminster is built upon what was once an island - Thorney \ Island - a marshy retreat from the City of London. Churches existed \ there since possibly as early as the seventh century, and in the \ 1050s, King \ Edward decided to turn the site into an \ eclesiastic-royal complex that was part monastery, part \ palace.
\For a thorough treatment of Edward\'s rebuilding of \ Westminster Abbey, and its relation to the Tapestry, see Gem (1981, \ 33-66). The structures in panels 66-67, panel 70 and, \ most likely, in panel 1 and panel 65 are \ representations of the original Westminster Abbey. Edward the \ Confessor commissioned this structure -- the first of the great \ Anglo-Norman churches built in England --c. 1050, and died \ shortly after its consecration in January 1066. Gem (33) notes the \ strong link between Westminster and the crown, and suggests \ Edward\'s rebuilding was designed to embody this link. For more \ information on and a reconstruction of this eleventh century site, \ see, respectively, the commentary for panel 67 and \ panel 70 \ and Museum: \ Westminster Abbey. The Vita Ædwardi (in \ Barlow (1981, 68-71)) contains a \ detailed description of the eleventh-century abbey.
\Index: Westminster, representation of palace at, \ panel 1, \ panels \ 64-65, panel 70, panel 72, \ panel 75; \ representation of Abbey, panel 66-67, Museum: Westminster \ Abbey, Museum: Abbey of \ Jumièges.
'; map["1"]={"html":"","caption":"Panel 1"}; map["1"].html='Panel 1:
\King Edward and Earl Harold Godwinson talk at Westminster \ Palace.
'; map["2"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 2-6"}; map["2"].html='Panels \ 2-6:
Harold rides to his estate in Bosham, where he feasts.
'; map["3"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 7-16"}; map["3"].html='Panels \ 7-16:
Harold crosses the Channel and lands in Ponthieu, possibly \ because his ship was blown off course.
'; map["4"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 17-21, 22-28"}; map["4"].html='Panels \ 17-21 and 22-28:
Count Guy takes Harold to Beaurain. William hears \ of Harold\'s capture and sends messengers to Guy.
'; map["5"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 29-33"}; map["5"].html='Panels \ 29-33:
\Count Guy of Ponthieu hands Harold over to William, possibly \ at the border city of Eu.
'; map["6"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 34-39"}; map["6"].html='Panels \ 34-39:
\William takes Harold to his palace, probably at Rouen, where \ the two leaders converse.
'; map["7"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 40-45"}; map["7"].html='Panels \ 40-45:
\Harold accompanies William on his Breton Campaign. They \ travel past Mont St. Michel, and cross the dangerous Couesnon \ River, where Harold rescues some of William\'s troops from \ quicksand.
'; map["8"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 46-54"}; map["8"].html='Panels \ 46-54:
\Norman forces attack Conan at Dol. Conan flees and the \ Normans pursue him past Rennes, before the Breton count surrenders \ at Dinan.
'; map["9"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 55-60"}; map["9"].html='Panels \ 55-60:
\After the victory, William bestows arms upon Harold. They \ travel to Bayeux, where Harold swears a sacred oath to William.
'; map["10"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 61-63"}; map["10"].html='Panels \ 61-63:
\Harold returns to England, possibly landing at Bosham or \ Dover (shown here) and travels to see Edward at Westminster.
'; map["11"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 64-75"}; map["11"].html='Panels \ 64-75:
\Harold and King Edward meet a second time, and Harold \ reports on his trip. Edward dies and is buried in the newly \ consecrated Westminster Abbey. Harold is offered and accepts the \ English crown.
'; map["12"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 76-80"}; map["12"].html='Panels \ 76-80:
\An English ship travels to Normandy and a messenger gives \ news to William. William, with the advice of his half-brother Odo, \ orders the construction of an invasion fleet.
'; map["13"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 81-92"}; map["13"].html='Panels \ 81-92: Trees are cut down and ships are constructed, most likely at \ the port city of Dives-sur-Mer. Provisions, weapons, horses and \ troops are loaded onto the finished ships.
'; map["14"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 93-103"}; map["14"].html='Panels \ 93-103: According to literary sources, the fleet first sailed from \ Dives-sur-Mer to St. Valery, perhaps after being blown off-course. \ At St. Valery the fleet waited for some two weeks, either for fair \ weather or news of Harold, before crossing the channel overnight on \ September 29.
'; map["15"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 104-118"}; map["15"].html='Panels \ 104-118:
\Upon landfall in the Pevensey Bay, Norman forces raid the \ land to secure provisions. William feasts and holds council with \ his brothers, Odo and Robert, hold a feast, and Norman soldiers \ construct or augment defensive works around Hastings, as well as \ burn area houses.
'; map["16"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 119-133"}; map["16"].html='Panels \ 119-133:
\The English forces march south from London and take up \ position on a ridged hill, blocking the road that leads out of the \ Hastings Peninsula to the rest of England. Scouts from both sides \ report to their leaders. William moves his forces over Telham hill \ to south of Harold and prepares to attack.
'; map["17"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 134-140"}; map["17"].html='Panels \ 134-140, 7:30AM-9:00AM:
\On the morning of October 14, the Norman \ forces set out towards the English position from their camp on \ Telham Hill. William gives a speech to his troops and Norman army \ then sets forth for battle.
\Click on the "Panorama" sites to view 360 degree video of the \ actual battlefield.
'; map["18"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 141-161"}; map["18"].html='Panels \ 141-161, 9:00AM-6:00PM:
\For the initial attack, Norman archers \ provide a covering fire, and then Norman cavalry charge forward \ towards the Anglo-Saxon shield wall. William organized his army \ into three distinct flanks, comprised of Bretons, Normans, and \ other French and Flemish forces, respectively. The first attacks \ apparently failed, and it is possible that at this point Norman \ morale broke and the English left their defensive positions to \ counterattack. This attack failed, perhaps because of the deaths of \ Harold\'s brothers Gyrth and Leofwine, or perhaps because leaders \ such as William, Eustace and Odo rally the Norman troops. At this \ point, the so-called malfosse may have occurred, with \ English troops caught outside their lines making an unexpectedly \ stubborn stand in a ditch-like defensive position.
For the rest of the day, the battle continues, probably in the \ pattern of archery and cavalry assaults on the English position \ followed by rest and regrouping of troops. \Click on the "Panorama" sites to view 360 degree video of the \ actual battlefield.
'; map["19"]={"html":"","caption":"Panels 162-173"}; map["19"].html='Panels \ 162-173, 6:00PM-9PM:
\Late in the afternoon, Norman forces launch \ one more attack, preceded by archers who may have altered their aim \ to allow arrows to fall more sharply on the Anglo-Saxon shield \ wall. Harold may have been wounded or killed during this initial \ assault. During this cavalry attack, word spreads that Harold has \ died, and English forces scatter and flee into the woods to the \ north of their position. By late that evening or early the next \ day, Norman forces control the area and English resistance is \ non-existent.
Click on the "Panorama" sites to view 360 degree video of the \ actual battlefield.'; map["20"]={"html":"","caption":"Battlefield, west panorama"}; map["20"].html='On opening, this video shows the view from the west end of the \ Norman battle line, on the lower slopes of the hill where Battle \ Abbey now stands (and about where William\'s Breton troops would \ have stood), looking northeast across the Norman line and also \ forward towards the English position. The crenelated towers to the \ left are part of lodgings built for Queen Elizabeth II. To the \ right of these towers, beyond the large tree, is the approximate \ position of the center of the English line, where Harold would have \ originally stood with his standard.
\Rotate the video to the left. To the left of the lodging, beyond \ the trees, is the position of the west end of the English battle \ line and then the wooded area into which Harold\'s troops would have \ fled at the end of the battle (see panels 172-173). Continue to rotate to \ the left. On the other side of the line of tall trees is the \ location of the marshy area where some English, trapped outside \ their position, may have made a brief defence (the so-called \ malfosse episode -- see panel 157). Rotating further, the slope \ to the bottom of the hill becomes apparent. The treeline off in the \ distance is the area to the south of the battlefield, and contained \ a low-lying marsh and, further to the left, the road southeast to \ Telham Hill.
\\ For another view of the battlefield, click on the "East View" \ button.
\Video panoramas courtesy Armchair Travel Co, London \ (http://www.armchair-travel.com).
'; map["21"]={"html":"","caption":"Battlefield, east panorama"}; map["21"].html='On opening, this video shows the view from the east end of the \ Norman battle line, on the lower slopes of the hill where Battle \ Abbey now stands (and about where William\'s Flemish and French \ troops would have stood), looking northwest across the Norman line \ and also forward towards the English position. The pointed-roof \ building to the right is a part of the monks\' dormitory of Battle \ Abbey (built by William to commemorate the battle). To the left of \ this structure, beyond the two large trees, is the approximate \ position of the center of the English line, where Harold would have \ stood with his standard.
\Rotate the video to the right. To the right of the Abbey \ dormitory would have been the east end of the English line and the \ spot where Harold is believed to have fallen (see panels 168-170). \ Continue to rotate to the right. To the right of the grazing sheep \ note the dip in the treeline; this area roughly marks the direction \ of the road which led back to Telham Hill-- William would have \ marched down this road to take up his position. To the right of \ this point is an area thought to have been low-lying marshes, and \ may include the location of the malfosse episode (see \ panel \ 157).
\\ For another view of the battlefield, click on the "West View" \ button.
\Video panoramas courtesy Armchair Travel Co, London \ (http://www.armchair-travel.com).
'; var helpright=' |
| Tapestry |
| Search |
| Glossary |
| Map |
| Genealogy |
| Library |
| Museum |
| Facsimiles |
|