Map of Normandy in France and Hastings in England
Khan Academy
Now David Musgrove and Michael Lewis suggest we re-analyse the magnificent Bayeux Tapestry regarding the 1066 Norman Conquest. As its key narrative, the Tapestry recorded the clash between England’s King Harold II Godwinson and Duke William of Normandy. But it omitted key elements: a] other battles in northern England and b] Edgar Ætheling. Those bits have been largely lost to history.
The Tapestry started with King Edward The Confessor with his leading Earl Harold in Westminster. Harold left for the coast, crossed the Channel and entered Duke William’s court in Normandy. The pair then conducted a successful military campaign against rebels in Brittany. Harold made an oath to William, in support of William’s claim to England’s throne.
The Earl returned to King Edward’s court, where that monarch died and was buried in Westminster. Harold immediately took the throne, in breach of the sacred oath he made in Normandy. William heard of the betrayal, built a fleet, assembled an army, crossed the Channel and waited for Harold. Harold brought his own force to Hastings, where he was killed and his army defeated; William was crowned in Westminster, Christmas Day 1066.
But the images were open to interpretation; even in 1066 there were different opinions about what led to the Norman conquest of England. Ambiguity in the Bayeux Tapestry was everywhere.
Worse still were the omissions. When Duke William landed at Pevensey, King Harold was already engaged in the north. He’d recently fought another contender for his throne, Norwegian King Harald Hardrada, who in alliance with Harold’s own brother Earl Tostig, had defeated an English army. Harold then crushed Hardrada-Tostig at the battle of Stamford Bridge, a victory later undone in the Battle of Hastings defeat.
Earl Tostig was installed as Earl of Northumbria by Edward the Confessor in 1055. But the inhabitants of Northumbria rebelled against him in 1065, ?because he was trying to introduce new taxes in the semi-autonomous north. Remember this had been the Danelaw, under the jurisdiction of the Vikings. Tostig grumbled, first setting out for his wife’s lands in Flanders, and then to the Scottish king, before ending up with Harald Hardrada.
Note Harold’s long march down south to Hastings wasn’t in the Bayeux Tapestry, ?because the Normans weren’t interested in these conflicts. Duke William would not have wanted the inclusion of these battles to cloud the viewer’s understanding.
And what happened to Edgar Ætheling? England had been ruled by the Danish King from 1016-35, then by his sons!! So as Edward’s reign progressed from 1042, having no obvious heir to Edward caused panic. Indeed efforts were being made to find the kin of Edward’s half-brother King Edmund Ironside, who’d reigned briefly before losing in a battle. In any case, a Norman king would have been unacceptable to the English elite.
In 1057 Prince Edward Ætheling came back to England from exile just as Uncle King Edward died. Happily Edward brought his toddler son, Edgar Ætheling. Did King Edward raise him as his natural successor?
Edward and Edgar’s histories were not in the Tapestry at all, except for the deathbed scene of the ailing king, showing Edward touching hands with Earl Harold, alongside the Queen. Did this show King Edward contented that Edgar would succeed him as king?
The Bayeux Tapestry showed Harold being offered the crown by two members of the Council of Ministers. He was then anointed king. But Edgar had been stitched out of the Tapestry altogether. Was he seen as too young?
In Jan 1066, after the old king died, England was facing a crisis. Whatever the nature of any promise to Duke William by King Edward in 1051, affirmed by Harold himself en route to Normandy in 1064, they knew William would claim the crown by force. And it was known that King Harald Hardrada might try, via his Scandinavian roots, to take lands claimed in northern England.
But historians know that after King Harold’s death at Hastings, and the advance of the Norman army north, London’s citizens chose Edgar as king. So Edgar was excluded from the Bayeux Tapestry for another reason: it was politically expedient to remove him.
Bishop Odo of Bayeux, William’s half-brother, played an important role in making the Bayeux Tapestry, as an advisor and a participant at Hastings. In written records, Odo was much less prominent than he appeared in the Tapestry, so the actual needlework was probably carried out under Odo’s patronage for self glorification. If the Bayeux Tapestry was to glorify Odo’s role in the Norman Conquest, then it seemed politically wise not to show Prince Edgar's legitimate future in his account.
Historians believed the Tapestry accurately showed a version of the Norman conquest that suited a situation soon after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, when the Normans were trying to appease the English, not dominate them. The Tapestry had been rooted in the politics, until the politics changed! By 1069–70 with the Harrying of the North, William’s patience with the English ended. The embroidery’s version of the Conquest was by then unfashionable!
After William the Conqueror’s death in 1087, Edgar got further into Anglo-Scottish politics, leading an English army north with King William II’s backing, and having his own nephew enthroned. After that he became a crusader in the Holy Land, returning via the Byzantine and German empires. Yet Edgar remained an undocumented figure, because the Tapestry omitted his story.
Was history written by the victor, not just on the field, but also for posterity? Read The Bayeux Tapestry by Dr K Tanton. Photo credits: Bayeux Museum.