John Huntley, follows my line of reasoning, in suggesting that any comparisons drawn between the Elgin Marbles & the Bayeux Tapestry are at best very weak. Comparing one case to another, misleads the public by distracting attention from the key issues behind each of the arguments.

From:
The Scotsman

30 June 2008
Losing your marbles

It is inappropriate to make comparisons between the Parthenon Marbles and the “Bayeux” Tapestry (your report, 25 June). The Parthenon Marbles were removed from the Acropolis in Athens by Lord Elgin in circumstances of doubtful legality. Regardless of where the Bayeux Tapestry was created and by whom, there is no dispute that it is lawfully located in Bayeux (a Normandy possession of the Norman Kings of England).

Whereas there is a real dispute over legal ownership of the Parthenon Marbles, the issue over the Bayeux Tapestry is simply where it would be most appropriately displayed, however temporarily. Thus it is reasonable to speak of the “Bayeux” Tapestry, but inappropriate to speak of the “Elgin” Marbles, rather than the “Parthenon” Marbles while their legal ownership remains unclear.
Read the rest of this entry »

It is usually the other way round – that the UK is faced with restitution claims for the artefacts in its museums & institutions, whether they are sculptures or human remains or other artefacts. Now though, there are claims that the Bayeux Tapestry should be returned from France, as it was originally made in England.

I have to say that this claim seems far weaker than most of the claims being made against England. The Bayeux Tapestry was made a very long time ago & although we can’t know the details, was likely moved freely within the country (which was controlled by Normandy at that time). Furthermore, it seems that England’s actual claim to have originally produced it is not universally accepted – it definitely does not have the clear provenance that many artefacts from other cultures now in the British Museum have. If the tapestry left the UK’s shores only a few years after it was made, surely its connection is now far stronger with the place that we have come to accept as it location rather than is original location (which can not be conclusively ascertained).

Notwithstanding the above issues, another issue exists of mobility could also be raised – this is not so much a valid argument as a point of comparison – how many English visitors can easily reached Normandy to visit the Tapestry in its current home, versus the number of residents from the area of Benin who can afford to travel to the British Museum?

From:
The Scotsman

Tapestry row sparks new Norman conflict
Published Date: 25 June 2008
By Stephen McGinty

IT IS the most famous cartoon strip in history, the story of the Norman Conquest in 1066 detailed in colourful weave and stitch.

But the Bayeux Tapestry, one of France’s national treasures, was, historians now believe, actually made in Britain and should be repatriated.
Read the rest of this entry »