Mind-Munitions

The Norman Conquest 65
commissioned by Bishop Odo for his new cathedral at Bayeux in or
about 1017 and as such can be regarded as a near-contemporary
record inspired by one who was actually present at the Battle of
Hastings. Told from the Norman point of view, and especially from
Odo’s (the Conqueror’s half-brother), the visual narrative was
designed for public display and depicts the defeated Harold in a
dignified light, although its purpose (apart from celebrating one of
the most impressive military achievements of the medieval world –
a fact fully appreciated by contemporaries and a great source of
myth-making afterwards) was to demonstrate the legitimacy of
William the Conqueror’s claim to the throne of England to the now
occupied peoples. In the build-up to the invasion, and even during
the battle of Hastings itself, Bishop Odo’s role is depicted as being
almost as prominent as that of the Conqueror, revealing the degree
to which the enterprise had both Church and family support.
But why was the tapestry made? Was it celebratory, possibly like
those early cave drawings or Roman victory columns? Perhaps
there was a strong element of this, although we know little about
the arrangements made for its display in England or Normandy.
Indeed, it would appear to have been made in England and
displayed in various English towns. Can the tapestry therefore be
regarded as a sort of visual epic poem? It is of course a work of art
in its own right, but its content can be interpreted on a variety of
different levels – one of which is entertainment (a potent medium
for propaganda). Was it perhaps designed to legitimize the invasion
and conquest on both sides of the Channel? The historian H. E. J.
Cowdrey has pointed out that in the first portion of the tapestry the
animals and fables depicted at the top and bottom of the work act
as a symbolic counterpoint to the central storyline: they ‘serve to
call into question the fair-seeming Harold of the main story. Things
are not as they seem. There is a cryptic reminder that Harold’s fine
appearance conceals an inner man who is flawed and false.’ This
may have been significant in view of the persistence of Harold’s
good reputation in England after his death, and the tapestry may
have been designed subtly to undermine that image during the
Norman occupation.
The final segment of the tapestry provides us with a vivid depiction
of medieval warfare and also indicates, chiefly in the lower
margin, just how crucial the Norman archers were in a battle that
was, after all, a close run thing. The Norman knight who butchers