Bayeux tapestry: let’s listen to the restorers

“We found the best experts in the world to explain in detail why it was absolutely impossible to lend this work. And, believe me, we found them, and, believe me, we could have found them again.”

This is how Emmanuel Macron (ill. 1) justified - in English - his decision to send the Bayeux Tapestry to London (ill. 2 to 4). One could hardly be clearer about how he regards experts: he couldn’t care less about their opinion, because he is the one who decides. On what authority? One wonders.

But which experts are we talking about? Not, as is sometimes the case, self-proclaimed specialists whose opinions might be questionable. On the contrary, we are speaking here of textile conservators who have worked on the tapestry itself. And there is no “dispute among experts” - as we are now beginning to hear in some quarters - since these experts are unanimous in denouncing the transport.

In 2018, we interviewed two of the conservators who had worked on the tapestry in 1981–1983, and who had already been very clear about the risks posed by a journey to England (see the article). The museum’s curator, Antoine Verney, now says - and we know why: he is a civil servant employed by the city of Bayeux, which is driving this initiative - that such a move would be possible. Yet seven years ago, he had told us that “the decision would [be] made solely on the basis of the study that [was going to be] carried out.” That study - a condition report - was completed in 2020. We asked the DRAC Normandie for access to it; they referred us to the Ministry of Culture (central services) and to the Élysée. We contacted the Ministry of Culture, which replied: “For any request concerning the Bayeux Tapestry, we invite you to contact the Élysée press office.”

Naturally, the Élysée never responded to our inquiries - which says a lot about how this matter is being handled, and how the press is regarded: as a mere vehicle for the presidential message.

In 2008, the embroidery was deemed untransportable. Has it suddenly become so - even though the planned restoration has still not taken place, has been indefinitely postponed, and in any case will not occur before it is moved to England?

Certainly not - and it is the State’s representative, the prefect of Calvados, who says so through the voice of Cécile Binet, museum advisor at DRAC Normandie, in a video entitled “Dépoussiérage de la tapisserie de Bayeux”, posted only five months ago. She is very clear about the feasibility of transporting the work: “The question was what to do with the work during the construction work, and the most logical answer would have been to restore the work at the same time, so as to reopen a renovated museum with a restored tapestry. But in fact, as the studies progressed, we realized that the tapestry was too fragile to be moved over a long distance, and that any additional handling would pose a risk to its preservation. We also realized that building or fitting out a space nearby for the restoration would be far too expensive. So we decided to keep the tapestry in a secure storage area during the works, and to restore it afterwards.”

So, five months ago, the Ministry of Culture (the DRAC) - in other words the French State - considered the tapestry too fragile to be moved over a long distance, even for restoration purposes.

We were able to contact three textile conservators who recently worked on the Bayeux Tapestry, in particular for the aforementioned condition report. They were unequivocal: the tapestry cannot be transported without serious risks to its integrity - all the more so as it has not yet been restored. Below are excerpts of what they told us.

“It is an object of absolute fragility, for which it had been decided to carry out restoration in situ to avoid any risk associated with transport.” “What has been decided is the opposite of everything we recommended.” “By choosing to ignore our recommendations, they discredit our profession as conservators, whose mission is to safeguard heritage.” “We have no personal stake in the Bayeux Tapestry - everything we do is solely to ensure its preservation.” “It will be subjected to repeated handling - and I’m not even talking about the usual risks involved in long-distance transport of artworks. On top of that, it hasn’t even been restored yet, and so will be leaving in its most fragile state.”

“I imagine this loan has only become possible because Mr Macron decided it should happen.” “This is likely to worsen the existing fragility of the linen and the tears already present. All current damage will be aggravated.” “Even the removal from its display case is a highly risky operation. The logical sequence - what had been decided - was to restore it before reinstalling it in a new case. It should not be moved during the works. We had removed the backing on the reverse that provided structural support.” “Had we known this, we might have been able to make use of the backing.” “It is a very long piece of linen - you have to have worked on it for years to understand its structure.” “It is an exceptional object, close to 1,000 years old - such decisions cannot be made hastily.”

“The risks begin the moment it is removed from the display case - it’s an extremely delicate operation.” “We used a facsimile to examine all the practical challenges.” “Nothing we planned for takes into account a long-distance transport.”

“The condition report documented the extreme fragility of the linen fabric and the overlapping techniques. It’s a ‘sandwich’ of different textiles that react in different ways.”
“The real risks include tears and enlarging of existing holes. The linen is so thin that handling could cause the warp threads to snap. It’s a mechanical issue - threads may break, as they are in a very precarious state.”
“Installation at the British Museum will involve further handling - extremely complex to carry out - both to install and uninstall, on an object that is itself extremely difficult to move.”
“I think the politicians don’t care about any of this - they don’t understand that they are holding a treasure in their hands, an extraordinarily fragile treasure. What we’re witnessing here is heritage being ‘consumed’.”

A word must be said, in light of all this, about the immense responsibility now resting on the British Museum, which is complicit in this scandal. In The Times, the museum stated that it had not been made aware of any conservation issues with the Bayeux Tapestry. Who do they think they’re fooling?

When contacted by us, here is what they replied: “The British Museum has a world leading conservation and collections management team who are highly skilled and experienced at handling and caring for this type of material. They will work closely with colleagues in France to ensure the Tapestry’s safety.” Sleep easy, good people - everything is fine. One hardly knows what to say in the face of such disregard for the facts we have just recalled.

We will end with this heartfelt cry from someone very familiar with the case - who cannot be named: “We all agree on one thing - it’s a monumental idiocy to send it to England. It’s absolute madness.”