No one is sure where is was made as a matter of fact. There are different theories.
Anyway, it's leaving France for the first time in a while. M Macron has a great way with him: knows how to flatter and cajole ...
Emmanuel LAINE @TriboKing Replying to @damongreenITV @hendopolis
Not quite. It is indeed tapistery. This technique described as "tapisserie a points d'aiguille" or "tapistery with needle points" was quite famous in medieval time. It is basically a needle work on canvas hence the description as tapistery. So the term is indeed correct.
I think this adds weight to the description of it as a tapestry -
tapestry
ˈtapɪstri/
noun
noun: tapestry; plural noun: tapestries
a piece of thick textile fabric with pictures or designs formed by weaving coloured weft threads or by embroidering on canvas, used as a wall hanging or soft furnishing.
"panelled walls hung with old tapestries"
used in reference to an intricate or complex sequence of events.
"the loopiness of the Commons adds to life's rich tapestry"
There's a full-size copy in the museum in Reading, made by some ladies in Victorian times. Some of the small figures on the border are naked, so the Victorian ladies added swiiming costumes to cover their modesty. Other than that it's an extremely good copy and well worth a (free) look if you don't want to go to France or wait for it to come over here.
More to the point perhaps is the question of where it will be displayed. The town of Hastings (or it might be nearby Battle – I’ve forgotten precisely what I heard on tonight’s news) would like the once in a lifetime privilege, but I don’t believe either Hastings or Battle has the facilities to cope with a large influx of Bayeux Tapestry fans, so the British Museum in London would be my choice.
so the whole basis of this post is so goodgoalie can impress us with his knowledge about what is a tapestry, right oh! Here's another one for you, bombay duck ain't duck! PMSL!
What always amazes me with early paintings and in this case tapestry, why couldn't the artists depict the human and animal form correctly, surely the artist must have stood back at his completed masterpiece and thought that looks nothing like a horse etc?