Feudal England: Historical Studies on the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries - John Horace Round

[³³] Ibid., ix. 27, 28.

[³⁴] English Historical Review, 219-25.

[³⁵] Ibid., ix. 607. The italics are Mr Archer's own. His own trusted authority, Wace, posts the English in 'un champ' (ii. 7729, 7769)!

[³⁶] Norman Conquest, iii. 419, 420.

[³⁷] No one, of course, would treat the Tapestry like a modern illustrated journal; but if it be fairly treated, in Mr Freeman's spirit, one's real wonder is that, under such obvious limitations, the designer should have been so successful as he has. Nowhere, perhaps, is the painstaking accuracy of the Bayeux Tapestry better seen than in its miniature representation of the fortress at Dinan. It shows us the motte, or artificial mound, surrounded by its ditch, and even the bank beyond the ditch, together with the wooden bridge springing (as we know it did in such castles) from that bank to the summit of the mound.

As to Mr Archer's attempts to show that Mr Freeman in one or two instances did not value so highly as he did what he deemed the supreme authority for the battle, I need only print Mr Freeman's words, parallel with his own comments, to show how their character is distorted.

Mr Freeman	Mr Archer
The testimony of Florence is by a witness more unexceptionable than all, by the earliest and most trustworthy witness on the Norman side, by the contemporary Tapestry ... in every statement but one.... The Tapestry implies—it can hardly be said directly to affirm—that the consecrator was Stigand (iii. 582). The representation in the Tapestry is singular. It does not show Stigand crowning or anointing Harold (iii. 620).	He rejects the Tapestry's account confirmed of Harold's coronation, following Florence of Worcester's statement—that Harold was crowned by Aldred, Archbishop of York—in avowed opposition to his own reading of the Tapestry, i.e. that Harold was crowned by Stigand.
It has been remarked by Mr Planché and others, that at this point the order of time is forsaken; the burial of Eadward is placed before his deathbed and death. On this Dr Bruce says very truly: 'the seeming inconsistency is very easily explained', etc., etc. (iii. 587) ... I do not think that any one who makes the comparison minutely (between the Tapestry and the Life) will attach much importance to the sceptical remarks of Mr Planché (ibid.).	He rejects in toto the Tapestry's version of Edward the Confessor's death, for that 'priceless record' makes Edward buried before he died! Mr Freeman, and perhaps not altogether without reason, follows the saner notion of other authorities, that Edward died before he was buried (English Historical Review, ix. 607).

Mr Freeman

Mr Archer

The testimony of Florence is by a witness more unexceptionable than all, by the earliest and most trustworthy witness on the Norman side, by the contemporary Tapestry ... in every statement but one.... The Tapestry implies—it can hardly be said directly to affirm—that the consecrator was Stigand (iii. 582). The representation in the Tapestry is singular. It does not show Stigand crowning or anointing Harold (iii. 620).

He rejects the Tapestry's account confirmed of Harold's coronation, following Florence of Worcester's statement—that Harold was crowned by Aldred, Archbishop of York—in avowed opposition to his own reading of the Tapestry, i.e. that Harold was crowned by Stigand.

It has been remarked by Mr Planché and others, that at this point the order of time is forsaken; the burial of Eadward is placed before his deathbed and death. On this Dr Bruce says very truly: 'the seeming inconsistency is very easily explained', etc., etc. (iii. 587) ... I do not think that any one who makes the comparison minutely (between the Tapestry and the Life) will attach much importance to the sceptical remarks of Mr Planché (ibid.).

He rejects in toto the Tapestry's version of Edward the Confessor's death, for that 'priceless record' makes Edward buried before he died! Mr Freeman, and perhaps not altogether without reason, follows the saner notion of other authorities, that Edward died before he was buried (English Historical Review, ix. 607).

One would hardly imagine from Mr Archer's sneers that Mr Freeman had really vindicated the Tapestry from its 'seeming inconsistency', did one not know him, as a writer, to be capable de tout.

[³⁸] Cont. Rev., p. 351.

[³⁹] English Historical Review, ix. 607.