"Saint, Bishop and Concubine" by David Reekie

This book endeavours to show that the Bayeux Tapestry, which records the defeat of King Harold II of England at the hands of the Norman Invader William the Conqueror at the Battle of Hastings in 1066,  was made in Canterbury, Kent. 

The evidence seems strong. As well as depicting the events on pictorial form, like a rather long strip cartoon, the Tapestry includes text which is written in Latin. However, the author points out that 

• “Some of the names are in a clearly English form ... For instance, the final letter of Harold’s brother Gyrth is the English letter 'thorne' a barred 'D' derived from the runic alphabet, instead of the latin 'D'.”
• "William is usually spelt as 'Willelm' in the English manner, rather than with the French 'G' of 'Wilgelm'.”
• “There is also the use of the English symbol for 'and' which is a reversed 'L', in place of the Latin ampersand & ('Et')”
• “The use of the English 'AT' rather than the Latin 'AD'”
• “The use of the English 'Caestra' rather than Latin 'Castra'. ('At Hastingae Caestrum')”
• “The opponents of Harold are in several places called not 'Normani' but 'Franci'. This follows English usage where Normans are often not distinguished from the French generally.”
• Although the Normans repeatedly described Harold as an Earl (because they wanted to suggest that his Kingship was illegal), the Tapestry describes him as 'Rex', Latin for King.

The text therefore suggests an English author. However, this doesn't locate the creation in Canterbury specifically. To do this, the author relies on more evidence from the Tapestry:

• It mentions two Normans called Vital and Wadard. It seems strange that two somewhat minor players should be honoured with names. Both Vital and Wadard were later involved with St Augustine's Abbey in Canterbury, the place where the authro suggests the Tapestry was embroidered.
• A prominent part in the Tapestry is played by Odo, half-brother to William and Bishop of Bayeux ... who was also Earl of Kent after the Conquest.
• One scene in the tapestry shows Odo at the centre of a feast at a curved table ... an image which seems remarkably similar to a Last Supper around a curved table in an illustrated manuscript in the possession of St Augustine's Abbey in the late 11th century.
• The Tapestry shows detailed knowledge of the area around Mont St Michel in Brittany; the treasurer of the Abbey of Mont St Michel at the time later become the Abbot of At Augustine's Abbey in Canterbury.

As well as this story of the tapestry, the author embroiders the background of many of the characters. As is often with books such as this, the extraneous details are often the most fascinating. For example:

• "The names Hengist and Horsa mean 'stallion' and 'mare'.”
• “Ethelbert was the first English monarch to reintroduce the use of coinage. This would have greatly stimulated trade and facilitated the exchange of goods. To start with only gold coins called 'tremises', or shillings, were used but later a smaller denomination called pennies, or 'sceattas', were introduced.”
• “Other peculiarities of Kent include the retention of an ancient system of inheritance called 'Gavelkind' which seems to have been unique to Kent. Under Gavelkind, unlike elsewhere in England which adopted primogeniture where the eldest son inherited land, the land was divided equally amongst the surviving sons. ... Gavelkind by contrast allowed land to be freely bought sold and exchanged so that larger landholdings could be built up by more successful farmers. ... Gavelkind survived in Kent until the 1920s.”
• “The names 'Baxter' and “'Brewster' are female forms of 'baker' and 'brewer'. 'Lady' comes from Old English 'Hlafdige' meaning 'Loaf kneader'.... The word 'wife' comes from 'weaver' and of course 'spinster' was an almost universal occupation for females whether married or not.”
• “There are only 3 women depicted in the main panels, and 370 men.”
• “Someone once counted a total of 93 penises shown in the Tapestry, most of which belonged to horses but some to men.”

A most unusual feature of this history book is that the author has provided monologues from some of the characters involved in the story. These are clearly reconstructed and fictional, but turn this book into a sort of hybrid between history and historical novel, a sort of literary version of a drama documentary.

Well written and informative. November 2020