How useful is the Bayeux Tapestry as a source for the events surrounding the Norman invasion of England?

The Bayeux tapis is unique and invaluable as an artefact of its time. It is non as simply as appears however and it is essential that we squ ar take away its provenance and date. We must also understand the idio synchroniserasies of its design if its to miss its place as a major authority for the events of the Norman conquest. A manoeuvre that must be addressed at the cast down of this prove on is that the Bayeux Tapestry finishes rather abruptly by and by Harold is slain and his force routed. The start of the Tapestry is b seted on three sides, so its likely the barricade would have been the same. It is roughly universally believed that the end of the Tapestry is missing. It could be presumed that the Tapestry spotless as it started - with a rightful king seated upon his social lion throne. However, these panels were either disjointed or never existed and as such the tapestry is non useful at all as a seminal fluid for the events after the Battle of Hastings and sure as shooting offers no teaching on Williams systematic conquest of England in the next decade. french folklore attributed the Tapestry to Matilda, Williams wife. Its creation is now attributed to Bishop Odo, although French historians do still try as much as possible to connect her in some way or form to the Tapestry because it is both more(prenominal) gallant and more poetic. There are several clues that allow us to connect the tapestry to Odo. first he is afforded prominence in the Tapestry out of sync with other contemporary accounts. He appears as advisor to the King, at one stage appear to even suggest the infringement of England. He appears as a spiritual leader at the last meal and as a warrior mass meeting the troops. H.P. Brooks and D.J. Berstein... If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our pa ge: cheap essay