-
- 2. Patrick Gomont
Mayor of Bayeux
Photo: Romain Bréget (CC BY-SA 3.0) - See the image in its page
Under the title “Face à la polémique, les révélations de Patrick Gomont”, *La Renaissance-Le Bessin-Côte de Nacre* publishes an interview with the mayor of Bayeux (available on Actu.fr) about the Bayeux Tapestry.
“Patrick Gomont — who is he?” you may be wondering (even the French are asking themselves that question). He is the mayor of Bayeux and, in this capacity, the custodian of the work, which remains the property of the French state. He claims that the figure of 70,000 signatures is “not very significant to us.” He is not entirely wrong: 70,000 is too few — even if it is a lot for a petition which we encourage you to sign — on a heritage issue, which rarely mobilises the masses. But the comment is quite amusing coming from the mayor of a town with fewer than 13,000 inhabitants, elected with just 2,216 votes. His legitimacy to decide the fate of a French national treasure seems even weaker.
Incidentally — and we shall address his arguments afterwards — he attacks me, saying I supposedly found a way to draw attention to myself. Clearly, like any seasoned politician, Patrick Gomont cannot conceive that one might prioritise the public interest over personal ambitions. The commitment of La Tribune de l’Art to our heritage has been unwavering for over twenty years — it would have been strange not to fight for one of its most precious works.
Finally, he “challenges anyone involved in the Tapestry case to [tell] him who Didier Rykner is.” He may be going a bit far: I freely admit that I am not widely known to the general public (and that does not bother me). I am slightly better known among those involved in heritage conservation. But again, coming from Patrick Gomont — a politician virtually unknown outside his own region (if that) — it is a rather amusing jab.
-
- 2. Anonymous, late 11th century
Embroidery Known as the Bayeux Tapestry (detail)
Linen and wool – 50 x 6838 cm
Bayeux, Musée de la Tapisserie de Bayeux
Photo: Didier Rykner - See the image in its page
Let us turn, then, to the substance of the matter. What are the “revelations” of the mayor of Bayeux (Patrick Gomont, let us not forget)?
– “The cost of the restoration was too high” because there was no building in Bayeux, nor within a 10-km radius of Bayeux, nor even “in Normandy” “capable of housing the work for its restoration under the required conditions.” Likewise, constructing a new building over 70 metres long was also too costly. He also explains that he considered restoring the work in England “if it couldn’t be done in France.”
His argument is absurd. Certainly, there was no site in Bayeux or nearby where it could be restored during the museum’s renovation, and building a special facility was too expensive — as explained on 30 January by DRAC Normandie in a video posted to the YouTube channel of the Calvados Prefecture, recently removed [1].
What Patrick Gomont (mayor of Bayeux, as a reminder) omits to mention is that the French state — relying on expert studies and the opinion of the scientific committee — ruled out any move of more than a few kilometres for the restoration. Normandy as a whole was never studied to find a building long enough to carry it out, let alone anywhere else in France or England. And how can Patrick Gomont (still mayor of Bayeux) claim to have considered restoration in England — in addition to the loan — when he admits earlier that he had already given up on restoration in France? Nothing would have prevented the Tapestry from being restored elsewhere in France, and then returned to the museum — had transport been an option.
Let us add that, for now, the Tapestry’s restoration has been postponed indefinitely. After the museum closes for two years, the city council wants to reopen to tourists immediately. Who can seriously believe they were ready to send it to England for restoration after its display at the British Museum?
– Regarding the video and the statement by the DRAC museum adviser, Patrick Gomont (yes, the mayor of Bayeux) claims: “We have such reactions because a person who worked for the DRAC and who is not an embroidery specialist probably said what she was told to say: that the Tapestry is not transportable.”
We would like to know who this “they” is — the one who supposedly instructed the Calvados Prefecture to declare it non-transportable, according to Patrick Gomont (mayor of Bayeux, for those not keeping track). Or rather, no — we do not need him to say it. It was the restorers and curators who have been studying this tapestry since at least 2020, and the scientific committee.
– But Patrick Gomont’s most laughable argument (still mayor of Bayeux) is that of the folded shirt in a wardrobe: “I don’t see how we could leave the Bayeux Tapestry folded accordion-style in a crate for two years without it being damaged. We always use the example of a shirt folded in a wardrobe and not moved for two years: there are marks at the folds!”
Let us be clear: storing the Tapestry in a box for two years is not risk-free — any handling and transport, even across a few hundred metres, is delicate. But all the textile conservation and restoration experts who have studied the work for over five years have developed, after years of research, a protocol that minimises these risks. They have designed a screen-like support which, of course, does not fold the embroidery, but stores it flat, in accordion style, in a specially made box. Comparing this to a folded shirt in a wardrobe is so foolish that using such an analogy is baffling — particularly from a politician one might assume to be responsible (we are speaking of Patrick Gomont, mayor of Bayeux and shirt-folding expert).
For those who would like to understand how it all works, we refer you to this video, of a lecture entitled “Importance des études préalables à la conservation-restauration de la ’Tapisserie de Bayeux’,” given by the restorers at the Institut national du patrimoine, which explains everything in detail.
There are other amusing statements among the “revelations” of the mayor of Bayeux (his name is Patrick Gomont — worth remembering). For example, he says that he “always believed in and worked towards this loan of the Tapestry to England,” and that, as we previously wrote, he even considered having it restored by the British Museum. Yet shortly afterwards he says he “met the British Museum for the first time a week ago.” Is that really credible?
His claim that there is “no suitable space in our museums for” an exhibition of works from the British Museum — nor the means to organise one — is just as fanciful. He immediately adds that an exhibition at the Musée Baron Gérard “will explore the history of the thousand-year-old embroidery, from its creation to the present day, around the theme of medieval Normandy,” and that another exhibition, “‘The history of the Tapestry during the war’ will be presented at the Musée mémorial de la Bataille de Normandie,” confirms that, like all regional museums, these institutions have exhibition spaces.
Let us also mention the third exhibition, to be shown at the Hôtel Doyen (another available venue in Bayeux) — this one “immersive,” and titled (perhaps unintentionally humourous) “Prendre soin de la Tapisserie” (“Taking care of the Tapestry”. Its budget will exceed €400,000, since the public tender for its organisation is for €393,107 [2]. An exhibition can hardly be staged for less than €100,000 — so we may conclude that the budget for these three exhibitions would almost certainly have been at least €600,000. That would have been enough to host works from the British Museum — had they wished to [3].
We can see, then, that the arguments of the mayor of Bayeux are not particularly convincing. But at least this interview will have allowed Patrick Gomont — whom hardly anyone knows — to finally get people talking about him.