Page 1 of 8

Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:22 pm
by Allen
If it does come to the UK, what are the chances of it being exhibited anywhere near Hastings or Battle?

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:31 pm
by cbe
Well since your MP is a senior cabinet minister and the tapestry is regarding the 'Battle of Hastings' it would be astonishing if it did not.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:02 pm
by Derek Jempson
It is utterly inconceivable that the tapestry could be shown anywhere other than the Hastings/Battle Area.

There is a petition to sign here, although not for a day or two:

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:46 pm
by Richard
It was commisioned by relatives of William the Bastard, and has been in France for 950 years, this temporary 'loan' to us, perhaps by the year 2020, is therefore, something quite new.
It is not as if they 'stole' it from us, unike the Elgin Marbles being appropriated when Greece was under Turkish rule.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:36 pm
by cbe
I cannot see that anyone is suggesting it is 'ours'. merely that the place to display it is Hastings.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:13 pm
by Richard
To my mind and being slightly negative it reinforces impressions of a French determination to subjugate, or control, the British through history.
Of course it was not the first attempt to get a foot-hold on these shores, Religion and intermarriage have led to many alliances and wars down the centuries.
The French owned lands in this country (and we in theirs) both before and after the Conquest.
De Gaul with arrogant high-handedness, vetoed our first attempts to join the Common market, as it was then.
Even today France wishes to profit from our Brexit by encouraging relocation of 'workers' with expertise in Banking, from London to France.
To have Teresa May pay more millions for deterrent fences and patrols in Calais and to request that we accept more immigrants who are causing a nuisance in France on their way to Britain.
The 'tapestry' was woven by local workers in Canterbury and done under French control.
I fail to see why we should feel proud, happy, keen or eager, to see what amounts to a work depicting French victory paraded under our noses in Hastings.
Not only that but we don't even know where the battle was fought and no remains of weapons or bones have ever been found in evidence.
The Old Town boast a headquarters of Wellington and the Martello Towers dotted along the coast, not forgetting the Military canal, all bear witness to invasion fears more recently, from Napoleon's invasion forces.
They can keep the 'tapestry' as far as I am concerned, even though I have a French cousin, on my mother's side, a love of French food and wine and many things beside.
France with perfect conduits via the Tunnel and shipping routes is a liability in terms of uncontrolled immigration and they know it.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:02 am
by cbe
Good heavens - where to begin. Just a simple but reasonable post from someone hoping that the tapestry would be on display in or near to Hastings has produced a whole mish-mash of anti-French vitriol. At this point I should say that I am second to no-one in my dislike, not of France or its peoples, but of French politicians. But some perspective please.

Firstly the Normans were of Viking stock but leaving The Conquest aside I am trying to recall other examples of France's determination to subjugate us. You touch on marriages and alliances as proof of trying to gain control over another's country. We are as 'guilty' of such alliances as anyone but I would suggest that throughout history the real reason for this is either to gain treasure or to afford protection from the country with whom the alliance has been made.

We then touch on France hoping to gain from Brexit by tempting the banking industry and its workers from London to Paris. Firstly I don't think that is to be unexpected. Secondly it is only part of the constant war of words, aided and abetted by our own press, to stop Brexit. Thirdly, they do not have a cat in hell's chance of succeeding.

You range too across the many extras millions they are getting out of Mrs May towards defences and protection at Calais and indeed to get us to accept more migrants, that is merely a French politician taking advantage of a very weak British politician. On this particular point any complaint should be laid at the door of number 10 and nowhere else. As regards perfect conduits for illegal immigrants crossing from France, that is correct, but an inclination on the part of this country to stop illegal immigrants would be a better starting point.

If they tapestry comes, I think they are awaiting permission from the relative mayor, I would expect it to be displayed at Hastings and if it is I will go to see it. Some on here may remember a previous post on here about my previous viewings of the tapestry. I would expect to perform batter next time.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:59 pm
by ColinL
It must be displayed in Hastings, not London or elsewhere. Canterbury might have a claim given that some people believe that it was embroidered in At Augustine's Abbey.

It is worth a visit regardless of who did what to whom a 1000 years ago. The historical, dramatic and annotated item is amazing

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:58 pm
by Richard
That is true cbe,
Normans were originally Vikings from Scandinavia but the Vikings intermarried with the French and by the year 1000, they were no longer Viking pagans, but French speaking Christians.
The French KIng at the time must bear some blame for the later Norman Invasion.
At the beginning of the tenth century, it was Charles the Simple (or Stupid) who gave lands in the North of France to a (huge) Viking chief named Rollo, in the hope that this would stop the Vikings from attacking France.

The people William the bastard conquered were immigrants from Germany, the Anglo-Saxons, ruled over by the great Viking Monarch, King Canute, ruler of Sweden, Denmark and England.
Canute was one of the most effective pre-conquest monarchs that people have never really heard of. Many Danes flooded into England as a result of Canute's power and in England it is estimated that they may have made up to 20 per cent of the population, whilst in Normandy they were less than 5 per cent.
So England was already invaded (by immigration) by more Viking Danes of basic stock than the assimilated Viking Normans who had become French speaking and intermarried.

Thereafter, the real pure-blood Viking invasion came from the North, where poor Harold (related to Canute) decisively defeated the invasion of 300 Longships manned by men from all over the Viking world, only to be himself defeated by the forces of Duke William the Bastard of Normandy, marshalling forces of the interbred Normans of diluted Viking stock arising as a result of the weakness of a French King for giving the Normans lands in which to cultivate a power base on French soil.
Also, it may not be commonly realised that there was great Viking involvement in the resistance to Norman Conquest, in the early days, but that is too complex to explain in just a few words.

Re: Bayeux Tapestry

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:28 pm
by Richard
The so-called Tapestry is not a legal document of historical importance, unlike the Magna Carta.
There can be no doubting the historical importance of Magna Carta, it established the principle, nearly 803 years ago, and sealed at Runnymede, that the executive power - in this case, the king - is subject to the law just like everyone else.
Four surviving copies of the Magna Carta are held in this country.
Simon de Montfort, wholly French by birth and education, was a one-tme friend of Henry III and laid claims to the Earldom of Leicester and promoted the establishment of a Parliament taking powers away from the KIng and this intention was generally supported by the Barons, although Simon often alienated them: ... ns-war.htm

The Bayeux Tapestry is doubtless of some great historical importance but in reality it is one-dimensional, merely a pictorial representation of a famous Battle and signifies nothing at all other than the fact that it is a cartoon version of French Normans conquering Harold's army.