The only thing that puzzles me is why the people researching it think “nuns” and “professional embroiderers” are mutually exclusive categories. Still, interesting.
Another great one, whithout exclusion : The tapestry of Angers : Splendid !!
Bayeaux Tapestry Not a Tapestry…
Uuuugh. I’m not going to lie, I hate this kind of “inside scoop” writing. “Not a tapestry, it’s an embroidery.” Woooooo! Not five people reading that headline were even capable of making that distinction much less interested in doing so, but with the false sense of superiority we’re encouraged to cultivate over the morons of the past – Can you bewieve it? They thought the the Bayeaux Embroidery was a Tapestry! The horror! The horror! – we’ve now just taken one more collective hit on the bong of Enlightenment.
I’m sorry. I need to lie down. It’s just … this is … I hate you, François-Marie.
The article doesn’t say the tapestry wasn’t made by nuns, it just says it wasn’t made by nuns “across England” — that is, it says that the whole thing was made by one group.
When I read that my first thought was to wonder if the man who commissioned the tapestry kept asking, “How’s Bayeaux?”
People too young to remember Allan Sherman probably will not understand that completely.
On the “nuns” vs. “professional embroiderers”, given the fact that most 8-year-old girls in the 19th century could embroidery rings around me, I’d say the debate is based more on modern naivete than any real distinction! The needlework, of all varieties, produced by my grandmothers’ generation leaves me in awe, with most of those ladies being “just housewives”.