Block 3. Who writes History?

So what is it and who is it that determines how we in the ‘present’ understand the past?

« Who writes History? Discuss. « 

Would make an excellent exam question.  But here we will just discuss it in class.

100 or 1000 years in the future, what will people make of our ‘present’ times?  What will come down to them which, in the context of their time, they will be able to interpret correctly and understand?

The picture above is of the Tower of London, as I am sure you will recognise: William Duke of Normandy’s seat of power after he invaded England in 1066 and set himself upon the throne. There were no ‘newspapers’ of the time (it pre-dated Gutenberg and Caxton and the invention of the printing press), so how was this to be recorded?   Great events had always been recorded by man: look at the events upon ancient Egyptian monuments… at Karnak, for example, is an Egyptian account of the Battle of Kadesh in the 12thCentury BC where Rameses has its history recorded as an almost single-handed victory by himself over the Hittites …. but the Hittites themselves have a different take on it inscribed upon walls and tablets at their capital Boghazköy.

So how and by whom was the Battle of Hastings recorded? 

William charged his brother, Bishop Odo,  to have a dramatic account produced of his total victory over the English king and army at the Battle of Hastings.  This, as you know, is now known as the Bayeux Tapestry.   This link takes you to a High-Definition online representation of the tapestry at the Tapisserie de Bayeux Museum.  However, as recently as some 10 years ago, there was no such representation – about the only way you could view one of the panels was on the front of a book for sale: the story was just not available online!   Bayeux Council records that in 2018 (pre-CoVid days) there were almost 388,000 visitors to the Tapestry.   The figure is reasonable, but hardly spectacular for a giant, 1000 year old record of what is a Norman French total victory over the English!!

• The museum is ‘out on a limb‘ in North West France – it is not at the Louvre
• The history of this total French victory over the English seems barely (if ever) to be touched upon in the French educational system
• King William of England (as he became) was a mere Duke in France: he elevated himself to become King by conquering another country.  For the King of France, he was more ‘Cousin’ (an ‘upstart‘ / not genuine) than ‘Brother’ so appears to have been marginalised, to the extent that he tends to be referred to in France (if at all!) as Guillaume Le Bâtard  / William the Bastard.  Strange name for the person who should be France’s greatest hero!  Napoleon conquered many contries in Europe and Africa and then lost them almost as quickly and does not have his lineage rulng France, whereas William, with one battle & victory plus a ‘master plan’ (The Domesday Book), ruled England until he died and left his descendants upon the throne of  this ‘Sceptred Isle‘ (as Shakespeare put it) where his heirs have reigned for almost 1000 years (Queen Elizabeth ii is a draws her claim to the throne direct from William and his daughter: Countess Adela of Blois).

So you will forgive me if I relate the following somewhat ‘tongue-in-cheek‘:

• Ask any English child to name a date in English History, the response will be immediate: « 1066 – the Battle of Hastings » followed by the « Norman Conquest ».  Even 1000 years on, the English remember this invasion as if it is in their blood.   Can French students do the same – even when it remains a total victory over the Anglo-Saxons?!?
• So, the 100 Years War was the French v the Anglo-Saxons was it?   Not really!  It was the descendants of King William and his Norman French ruling class fighting his former contrymen in France to keep the original lands and possessions of his Dukedom: his heritage in France.
• I laugh when I hear about ‘La Perfide‘ and France’s general distain for the Anglo-Saxons…. Why?  Because William killed all the Anglo-Saxon lords and leadership in England!  Anglo-Saxon power was usurped and totally eradicated by King William to which the Bayeux Tapestry and the Domesday Book testify: almost all that remains to us is William’s Norman French heritage:
  • the language of the court, of business and of the law became French and remained so for some 200+ years!  The system of law still maintains 1000 years on!
  • William installed his Norman French system of law in England.  It remains unchanged. In France Napoleon changed it for his codified system… the English have kept the original French version going!
  • the English are somewhat (as Eddie Izzard the comedian and actor put it): a ‘Mongrel Nation‘: our language is a mix of Latin (Julius Caesar’s invasion); Saxon (incursions from what we now know as Germany); French (William the Conqueror’s invasion), Danish/Scandinavian (Viking incursions to the East of England), but it perhaps resembles French more than any other language either in the use of identical words (somewhat irritatingly, occasionally meaning different things – hence ‘faux amis‘) or words of similar length and sound that have been slightly anglicised to make it easir for tongue and palet (for example, William’s French master builders brought over the word ‘echaffaudage‘ – in English transmute to: ‘scaffolding‘
• To conclude, I might advance the hypothesis that there always seems to be friction between the English and the French NOT because we are so very different, but rather because we are so ALIKE!!  Perhaps this is why the English / British have come to France’s aid in two world wars – we are perhaps brothers under the skin – despite Brexit!

So… to go back to the Battle of Hastings and the Norman Conquest and the eradication of the Anglo-Saxon nobility and class….

The storyline and the dramatic scenes of battle an victory were prescribed, of course, by the victors themselves…. but the work of weaving every thread would be the job of the vanquished: English weavers: every panel they were to produce was designed to add insult to their injury and ‘rub salt in the wounds‘ of their country’s defeat.

So my questions are these:

1. If History is written by the Victors …. why, in this case, do the victors seem to have forgotten it and re-written a different historical and cultural understanding?

2. I won’t ‘see’ the 1000th anniversary of the Battle of Hastings and William’s Norman Conquest of England … but towards the twilight of your career: you  WILL(iam) in 2066!  How would you prepare to ‘set the record straight‘ and explain to the French the glory of a famous victory that has endured 1000 years which they seem to have forgotten.  The Brits perhaps need to understand the cultural brotherhood between the two nations too in the light of this reality….  Could be interesting both from a Museums (in France and England) and Archives (Domesday Book / Bayeux Tapisserie) perspective.  What a job that might be!  And you will be at the height of your professional powers and position at that point in time!  If ever you do get involved in it: remember me for the long-range idea and give my kids, grandkids and great grandkids a free grand tour of whatever you produce!

3. A broader Q: Are the marvels of our age like the Internet and mobile phones with cameras, GPS and connectivity going to change how, in what form and by whom History is written and how it may be interpreted and understood in the future?

For Info: I wrote this when I heard about a museum-led project to copy and save ALL of Trump’s Tweets sent before, during  (and perhaps after?) his Presidency in case, being digital and ephemeral, they just disappeared….  History and its recording is changing and fast…. and you are going to be right in the middle of it all.  What will it be like in 2066!!!???