¹ The numbering of the Bayeux Tapestry scenes follows that on the embroidery itself (see Wilson, D. M., The Bayeux Tapestry [London, 1985], 1–74Google Scholar, for a full-colour facsimile, though the scene numbers are not given).

² The numbering of figures in the Bayeux Tapestry follows Lewis, M. J., The Archaeological Authority of the Bayeux Tapestry (Oxford, 2005)Google Scholar, 267 ff; see also Lewis, M. J., Owen-Crocker, G. R., and Terkla, D. (eds.), The Bayeux Tapestry. New Approaches (Oxford, 2011)Google Scholar, 165 ff.

³ Lewis, M. J., ‘Identity and Status in the Bayeux Tapestry: The Iconographic and Artefactual Evidence’, Anglo-Norman Studies 29 (2007), 101Google Scholar.

⁴ The Tapestry designer gives Harold the comital title dux, instead of the Old English form, eorl.

⁵ G. Beech, Was the Bayeux Tapestry Made in France? The Case for St. Florent of Saumur (New York, 2005), 69.

⁶ Such as William of Poitiers in his Gesta Guillelmi (‘The Deeds of William’, completed c. 1077), leading modern scholars to debate its historical reality: see Lucien Musset, La Tapisserie de Bayeux (Paris, 1989), 261, who considers it historical reality; Simone Bertrand, The Bayeux Tapestry (Rennes, 1978), 15, who believes that the Tapestry ‘“pays homage” to Harold's chivalresque gesture’. In contrast, R. H. C. Davis, ‘William of Poitiers and His History of William the Conqueror’, in R. H. C. Davis and J. M. Wallace-Hardrill (eds.), The Writing of History in the Middle Ages. Essays Presented to Richard William Southern (Oxford, 1981), 82, dismisses it as nothing but ‘a piece of Herculean folklore’ (note the classicizing reference).

Regarding the Breton war more generally, not only does the Tapestry's story differ from that of the other main account of this war, as told by William of Poitiers, but its outcome is more favourable to Duke William, in that his defeat of Count Conan is humiliating and comprehensive. Beech (n. 5), 62, 122, notes that, while later historians (such as Orderic Vitalis, 1075–1142/3, and William of Malmesbury, c. 1090–c. 1142) mention the Breton campaign, their ‘brief allusions’ are based upon William of Poitiers’ account. D. Bates, William the Conqueror (New Haven, CT, and London, 2018), 200, adds Wace (c. 1100–74) to the mix of those near-contemporary sources that mention this war. See also L. Musset, The Bayeux Tapestry (Woodbridge, 2005), 18; R. H. C. Davis and M. Chibnall (eds.), Gesta Guillelmi of William of Poitiers (Oxford, 1998).

⁷ ‘Come then, dear father, place yourself upon my neck; my own shoulders will support you, the task will not weigh me down…Let little Iulus be my comrade…’ So, saying this, once I had thrown garments on my broad shoulders and neck, and covered them with a tawny lion's pelt, I stooped to the burden; little Iulus interweaves his hands and follows his father with unequal steps…’ Aeneid translations throughout adapted from H. Rushton Fairclough (ed. and trans.), Virgil. Eclogues. Georgics. Aeneid. Books 1–6, rev. G. P. Goold, Loeb Classical Library 63 (Cambridge, MA, 1916).

⁸ P. G. Walsh, ‘Virgil and Medieval Epic’, in R. A. Cardwell and J. Hamilton (eds.), Virgil in a Cultural Tradition. Essays to Celebrate the Bimillenium (Nottingham, 1986), 52, 60; C. Baswell, Virgil in Medieval England. Figuring the Aeneid from the Twelfth Century to Chaucer (Cambridge, 1995), 12, 33; T. Webber, ‘Textual Communities (Latin)’, in J. Crick and E. van Houts (eds.), A Social History of England, 900–1200 (Cambridge, 2011), 335–6; E. Tyler, ‘Trojans in Anglo-Saxon England: Precedent without Descent’, Review of English Studies, n.s. 64.283 (2013), 8.

⁹ The Bayeux Tapestry was most likely created soon after the events it depicts, perhaps between 1072 and 1077, upon the request of Odo, Bishop of Bayeux and half-brother of Duke William: see R. Gameson (ed.), The Study of the Bayeux Tapestry (Woodbridge, 1997), 161; M. J. Lewis, The Real World of the Bayeux Tapestry (Stroud, 2008), 191.

¹⁰ For example, W. Grape, The Bayeux Tapestry (Munich and New York, 1994), 58.

¹¹ For suggested viewers of the Tapestry – Anglo-Saxon, Norman, or an emerging ‘Anglo-Norman’ aristocracy – see e.g. S. A. Brown, ‘Cognate Imagery: The Bear, Harold and the Bayeux Tapestry’, in G. R. Owen-Crocker (ed.), King Harold II and the Bayeux Tapestry (Woodbridge 2005), 150–1; T. A. Heslop, ‘Regarding the Spectators of the Bayeux Tapestry: Bishop Odo and His Circle’, Art History 32.2 (2009), 223–49.

¹² P. Bouet and F. Neveux, La Tapisserie de Bayeux. Révélations et mystères d'une broderie du Moyen Âge (Rennes, 2013), 31. See also F. Neveux, ‘L'expédition de Guillaume le Bâtard en Bretagne (vers 1064)’, in J. Quaghebeur and S. Soleil (eds.), Le pouvoir et la foi au Moyen Age en Bretagne et dans l'Europe de l'Ouest (Rennes, 2010), 617–37; K. S. B. Keats-Rohan, ‘L'expédition de Guillaume, duc de Normandie, et du comte Harold en Bretagne (1064): le témoignage de la tapisserie de Bayeux et des chroniqueurs anglo-normands’, Mémoires de la Société d'Histoire et d'Archéologie de Bretagne 40 (2013), 203–24.

¹³ C. H. Gibbs-Smith, The Bayeux Tapestry (London, 1973), 11. However, for another view, see G. R. Owen-Crocker, ‘The Embroidered Word: Text in the Bayeux Tapestry’, in R. Netherton and G. R. Owen-Crocker (eds.), Medieval Dress and Textiles 2 (2006), 55.

¹⁴ Its Romanesque abbey was built upon the orders of Duke Richard II of Normandy (r. 966–1026). Some scholars have suggested that the depiction of Mont-Saint-Michel in the Tapestry shows that the designer of the embroidery ‘knew the abbey well’ (Beech [n. 5], 69; Musset 2005 [n. 6], 130), but the church is clearly stylized, and does not relate well to what we know about how the abbey appeared in the mid eleventh-century from the archaeological evidence (Lewis [n. 2], 28–9; T. Rowley, An Archaeological Study of the Bayeux Tapestry. The Landscapes, Buildings and Places [Barnsley, 2016], 63–70). By 1064 there was at Mont-Saint-Michel a Breton monk named Scolland, who was to become the future Abbot of St Augustine's, Canterbury (1072–87), and therefore could have been involved with the production of the Bayeux Tapestry itself (H. Clarke, ‘The Identity of the Designer of the Bayeux Tapestry’, Anglo-Norman Studies 35 [2013], 120–39; E. C. Pastan and S. D. White, with K. Gilbert, The Bayeux Tapestry and Its Contents. A Reassessment [Woodbridge, 2014], 121–5).

¹⁵ William of Poitiers says that Conan was besieging Dol; therefore he should not be shown coming down from the castle itself as the Bayeux Tapestry has it (R. Gameson, ‘The Origin, Art and Message of the Bayeux Tapestry’, in Gameson [n. 9], 204). Other identifications have been made (see Beech [n. 5], 71). The inspiration for this scene is almost certainly an illustration in the Old English Hexateuch. In this illumination, the fleeing man is an Israelite spy escaping from Jericho, so it would fit also that the man on the rope is fleeing, and therefore it is Conan (Grape [n. 10], 111).

¹⁶ William of Poitiers suggests that ‘the Duke of Normandy had gained a limited victory’ over Conan (Beech [n. 5], 73).

¹⁷ Musset 2005 (n. 6), 130, 142, 150–2. It is worth noting that William of Poitiers places ‘the oath’ at Bonneville-sur-Torques, before the Breton expedition, whereas the Tapestry shows it at Bayeux and taking place after (N. P. Brooks and H. E. Walker, ‘The Authority and Interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry’, Anglo-Norman Studies 1 (1979), 28; Lewis (n. 9), 28.

¹⁸ Wilson (n. 1), 180.

¹⁹ Gibbs-Smith (n. 13), 11; M. Pagès I Paretas, El Tapís de Bayeux, Eina Política (Barcelona, 2015), 158.

²⁰ Musset 2005 (n. 6), 142.

²¹ Vita Ædwardi Regis ii.II (translation from F. Barlow [ed. and trans.], The Life of King Edward Who Rests at Westminster [Oxford, 1992], 119). This text contains references to the Aeneid, for which see further below.

²² See Brooks and Walker (n. 17), 81–91, for a discussion of Harold's death scene in the Tapestry. See also Heslop (n. 11), 239, for a reading of Harold's death against the Aeneid (considered below) and the phrase ‘double-death’.

²³ P. G. Walsh, ‘Virgil and Medieval Epic’, in Cardwell and Hamilton (n. 8), 52, 60; C. Baswell, Virgil in Medieval England. Figuring the Aeneid from the Twelfth Century to Chaucer (Cambridge, 1995), 12, 33; Tyler (n. 8), 8.

²⁴ See discussions by J. Zoilkowski, ‘Latin and Vernacular Literature’, and D. Luscombe, ‘Thought and Learning’, both in D. Luscombe and J. Riley Smith (eds.), The New Cambridge Medieval History. Vol IV, c. 1024–c. 1198, Part I (Cambridge, 2004), 658–92 and 461–98 respectively.

²⁵ G. R. Wieland, ‘A Survey of Latin Manuscripts’, in G. Owen-Crocker (ed.), Working with Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts (Exeter, 2009), 146 (table 4), 148.

²⁶ Ibid., 115, 148; see also Baswell (n. 23), 30.

²⁷ Baswell (n. 23), 31.

²⁸ Wieland (n. 25), 146 (table 4).

²⁹ Baswell (n. 23), 32; Wieland (n. 25), 148; Tyler (n. 8), passim.

³⁰ Walsh (n. 23), 52, 60; Baswell (n. 23), 12, 33; Tyler (n. 8), 8.

³¹ Baswell (n. 23), 31–2, 36–7; Tyler (n. 8), 4–9.

³² Tyler (n. 8), 1–3. She notes, however, that the Anglo-Saxons did not claim a Trojan ancestor in order to make a deliberate political statement of exceptionality. See also R. Southern, ‘Aspects of the European Tradition of Historical Writing, 1: The Classical Tradition from Einhard to Geoffrey of Monmouth’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser. 20 (1970), 243–63; M. Coumert, Origines des peoples. Les récits du Haut Moyen Âge occidental (550–850) (Paris, 2007).

³³ On the influence of the Aeneid, see P. Bouet, ‘Dudon de S. Quentin et Virgile’, Recueil d’études en hommage à Musset, Cahiers des Annales de Normandie 23 (Caen, 1990), 215–36; E. van Houts ‘Historical Writing’, in C. Harper-Bill and E. van Houts, A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World (Woodbridge, 2002), 104.

The choice of Antenor by Dudo seems to have puzzled some modern scholars, such as Tyler (n. 8), 3, because later works of antiquity, particularly that by Dares Phrygius and Dictys Cretensis (discussed below), develop the Iliad's Antenor, a royal advisor sympathetic to peace, into a traitor who betrayed Troy to the Greeks. However, these late antique works, although extremely popular in the medieval period, do not seem to have been circulated widely until the mid to later part of the eleventh century, as Tyler herself notes (ibid., 8), in reference to English circulation. The choice of Antenor is therefore less problematic in Dudo's work, although this does little to explain the decision of William of Jumièges to emphasize Antenor's treachery. William's narrative does, however, suggest that the works of Dares and/or Dictys appear to have been known on the Continent by the 1070s, or perhaps even by the 1050s or 1060s, if van Houts is correct to date the revisions of Dudo's work in the Gesta Normannorum Ducum to these decades (E. M. C. van Houts, The Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumièges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigini, vol. 1 [Oxford, 1992], xxxii–xxxv). See further below.

³⁴ ‘And so the Daci called themselves Danai, or Danes, and boast that they are descended from Antenor; who when, in former times the lands of Troy were laid waste, “slipped away through the middle of the Greeks” and “penetrated” the confines “of Illyria” with his own men.’ Dudo, Historia Normannorum, 1.3. Translation from E. Christiansen (ed. and trans.), Dudo of Quentin, History of the Normans. Translation with Introduction and Notes (Woodbridge, 1998), 16 (with n. 77). Cf. Aen. 1.242–3: Antenor potuit, mediis elapsus Achivis, / Illyricos penetrare sinus… (‘Antenor could slip away from the Achaean host, and enter the Illyrian gulf…’).

³⁵ See H. Buchthal, Historia Troiana. Studies in the History of Medieval Secular Illustration (London and Leiden, 1971), 1.

³⁶ Van Houts 1992 (n. 33), xxxii–xxxv. See also van Houts 2002 (n. 33), 105.

³⁷ Iactant enim Troianos ex sua stirpe processisse, Antenoremque ab urbis exterminio cum duobus milibus militum et quingentis uiris ob proditionem illius ab eo perpetratam euasisse… (‘[The Goths] also boast that the Trojans were of their stock, and that Antenor, when forced to flee by his betrayal after the fall of Troy, escaped with two thousand soldiers and five hundred men…’). William of Jumièges, Gesta Normannorum Ducum i.3(4), translation from van Houts 1992 (n. 33), 14–16. See also Buchthal (n. 35), 3; Tyler (n. 8), 3.

³⁸ The first Norman duke was Rollo (c. 860–c. 930), a Viking, though he never used the comital title dux.

³⁹ Tyler (n. 8), 10–11. See also van Houts 2002 (n. 33), 108–9.

⁴⁰ Tyler (n. 8), 10–20.

⁴¹ Ibid., 12.

⁴² Encomium, 12–15 (Virgil, Aen. 5.114–24); Encomium, 18–21 (Virgil, Aen. 8.608–731). Both cited in Tyler (n. 8), 12.

⁴³ Tyler (n. 8), 14.

⁴⁴ E.g. the Trojan identity of the Welsh King Gruffydd, enemy of Edward and ally of rivals of the Godwin family, is undermined with Dido's insult to Aeneas that he is no Dardan (Vita Ædwardi Regis, 87–7; Aen. 4.365–7; Tyler [n. 8], 16). Gruffydd is further belittled by Virgilian parallels: he is ‘unequal to the fight’ (impar congressu, recalling the death of Troilus, the son of the Trojan King Priam, at the hands of the Greek hero Achilles) (Vita Ædwardi Regis, 86–7; Aen. 1.475; Tyler [n. 8], 16), and afraid to fight in hand-to-hand combat (conferre manum, a phrase connected to Turnus in the final book of the Aeneid) (Vita Ædwardi Regis, 86–7; Aen. 12.345, 12.480, 12.678; Tyler [n. 8], 16). Tyler suggests that ‘the humiliating portrait of the Welsh king may also have been a response to Anglo-Norman relations. The shared Welsh and Norman legends of Trojan descent raise the possibility that the denigration of the Welsh was aimed, however obliquely, at the Normans…The seemingly misplaced anxiety about the Trojan origins of the defeated Welsh may suggest that the old enemy is, at least in part, a stand-in for the real and new enemy, the Normans’ (Tyler [n. 8], 18–19).

⁴⁵ Tyler (n. 8), 15.

⁴⁶ E. Winkler, ‘The Norman Conquest of the Classical Past: William of Poitiers, Language and History’, Journal of Medieval History, 42.4 (2016), 456–78, but esp. 468–72. Winkler identifies Caesar and Theseus as other comparative figures for Duke William. For the dates of the Gesta Guillelmi, see van Houts 1992 (n. 33), xxxiv n. 65.

⁴⁷ Winkler (n. 46), 463.

⁴⁸ Ibid., 469–70 and see further below.

⁴⁹ Ibid., 470–1. It is interesting to note that the Welsh King Gruffydd is figured as Turnus within the context of single combat in the Vita Ædwardi Regis (see n. 44), as Harold is in the Gesta Guillelmi 134–7 (ii.22).

⁵⁰ Heslop (n. 11), 237–41, identifies these scenes as containing Aeneid allusions, but, as discussed below, other Aeneid episodes could be (and are) suggested for them. Furthermore, Heslop does not make the connection between the Tapestry and Wiliam of Poitiers’ choice of references.

⁵¹ Heslop (n. 11), 237–41. Prior to Heslop, C. R. Dodwell recognized an allusion to the classical device of foreshadowing, exemplified by the Shield of Aeneas and Aen. 1.712 (Dido's doom), in the Tapestry scene depicting Halley's comet and the ghostly ships in the border under the enthroned Harold (C. R. Dodwell, ‘The Bayeux Tapestry and French Secular Epic’, in Gameson [n. 9], 59 n. 74).

⁵² Owen-Crocker (n. 13), 54–6. Owen-Crocker identifies the other in the inscription for Scene 51, which paraphrases William's speech to his army. She notes a classical reference here to Cicero (56).

⁵³ Ibid., 54 nn. 42–3. Seneca Q Nat. 5.10.1 can also be added to this list.

⁵⁴ See Livy 1.18–21.

⁵⁵ Ovid Met. 15.418–52; the reference to Aeneas and Helenus is at 450.

⁵⁶ B. S. Bachrach, ‘Some Observations on the Bayeux Tapestry’, Cithara 27 (1987), 19–20; Heslop (n. 11), 248 n. 60.

⁵⁷ Heslop (n. 11), 238.

⁵⁸ J. Griffin (ed.), Virgil, The Aeneid, Translated by C. Day Lewis (Oxford 1986), 417.

⁵⁹ William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum 228.3–4. The passive verbs in the Ovid Met. 15.176–7 parallel discussed above (feror, dedi) also potentially support this reading of the Tapestry's inscription, as they imply that Pythagoras is not in control of his journey. However, for an alternative view, see Owen-Crocker (n. 13), 55.

⁶⁰ The Tapestry's Ælfgyva scene (15) could also possibility contain an allusion to the Aeneid (Aen. 4.160–219), which we intend to discuss elsewhere.

⁶¹ Dodwell (n. 51), 59 n. 74.

⁶² Heslop (n. 11), 239.

⁶³ If it is him: see discussion in Brooks and Walker (n. 17), 32–4.

⁶⁴ Turnus is dispatched with a sword to the chest in the final lines of the poem (Aen. 12.950).

⁶⁵ Heslop (n. 11), 240.

⁶⁶ Winkler (n. 46), 469.

⁶⁷ Brooks and Walker (n. 17), 14–17; Heslop (n. 11), 228.

⁶⁸ F. Wormald, ‘Style and Design’, in F. Stenton (ed.), The Bayeux Tapestry. A Comprehensive Survey (London, 1957), 25–36; C. Hart, ‘The Bayeux Tapestry and Schools of Illumination at Canterbury’, Anglo-Norman Studies 22 (2000), 117–67; Lewis (n. 2), 8–12.

⁶⁹ Wormald (n. 68), 31.

⁷⁰ British Library, MS Harley 603.

⁷¹ Utrecht, Universiteits Bibliothek 32.

⁷² W. Noel, ‘The Utrecht Psalter in England: Continuity and Experiment’, in K. van der Horst, W. Noel, and W. C. M. Wüstefeld (eds.), The Utrecht Psalter in Medieval Art. Picturing the Psalms of David (MS't Goy, 1996), 121 ff.; see also, in the same volume, 233–53.

⁷³ Wormald (n. 68), 31–3.

⁷⁴ British Library, MS Cotton Claudius B.iv.

⁷⁵ The Hexateuch, as its name suggests, is an illustrated Anglo-Saxon translation of the first six books of the Bible. It has over 550 contemporary illustrations, all by the same artist, but many are unfinished. Cyril Hart highlighted the uniqueness of this collection of drawings, but also the fact that its artist was indebted to the influence of the Utrecht and Harley Psalters. He also believed that the Hexateuch ‘was used directly’ by the designer of the Bayeux Tapestry and ‘probably more extensively than any other single source’. See Hart (n. 68), 123.

⁷⁶ Hart (n. 68), 155, 158. Hart parallels them with a similar drawing in British Library, MS Harley 2506 (copied at Fleury-sur-Loire by an English artist), probably from a ninth-century Lotharingian manuscript (British Library, MS Harley 647); MS Harley 2506 reached Canterbury by the late tenth century, where it influenced other manuscripts, including British Library, MS Tiberius B.v, of the early eleventh century. Given that the pair of fish is the zodiacal symbol for Pisces, it has been suggested that this implies that the Breton campaign took place in late February or early March (Musset 2005 [n. 6], 134), though it is probable that the war was later in 1064. The watery context is certainly fitting for what is shown above, and some commentators have argued that ‘these creatures seem deliberately chosen’ and are ‘arranged using the moralizing traits and values assigned by the bestiary tradition’: J. Frederick, ‘Slippery as an Eel: Harold's Ambiguous Heroics in the Bayeux Tapestry’, in Lewis, Owen-Crocker, and Terkla (n. 2), 122–3. The eels, for example, have been associated with duplicity – a trait that might be linked to Harold – though there is ambiguity here in the Tapestry as they are not clearly connected with him.

⁷⁷ M. J. Lewis, ‘La Tapisserie de Bayeux et l'art anglo saxon’, in S. Lemagnen, S. A. Brown, and G. Owen-Crocker (eds.), L'Invention de la Tapisserie de Bayeux (Rouen, 2018), 237–41.

⁷⁸ S. Larratt Keefer, ‘Body Language: A Graphic Commentary by the Horses of the Bayeux Tapestry’, in Owen-Crocker (n. 11), 98–9 nn. 26, 32, with bibliography.

⁷⁹ Ibid., 98–9.

⁸⁰ Ibid., 97–8.

⁸¹ As posited by ibid.

⁸² O. K. Werckmeister, ‘The Political Ideology of the Bayeux Tapestry’, Studi Medievali, 3rd ser. 17 (1976), 535–95.

⁸³ Column Scene 31. Numbering follows the divisions set out by C. Cichorius, Die Reliefs der Traianssäule, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1896–1900); see also R. B. Ulrich, ‘Trajan's Column in Rome’, 2017, <http://www.trajans-column.org/?page_id=107>, accessed 28 February 2019.

⁸⁴ As Brooks and Walker (n. 17), 67–8, highlighted. Indeed, they find ‘the parallels [between the Tapestry and column] tenuous in the extreme’. See also D. Bernstein, The Mystery of the Bayeux Tapestry (London, 1986), 95–7.

⁸⁵ Bernstein (n. 84), 95–7.

⁸⁶ See e.g. Aeneas and Anchises on the denarius of L. L. Regulus, Rome, dated to 42 bce (P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus [Ann Arbor, MI, 1988], 35, 202–3, fig. 27b).

⁸⁷ See e.g. the wall painting from Pompeii (ibid., 201–2, fig. 156a) and the fresco of ‘dog-faced’ Aeneas from Stabiae, a parody of the Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius group (ibid., 209, fig. 162).

⁸⁸ N. Horsfall, ‘Some Problems in the Aeneas Legend’, CQ, 29.2 (1979) 376, 383–8; Zanker (n. 86), 202–3; P. Hardie, The Last Trojan Hero. A Cultural History of Virgil's Aeneid (London, 2014), 198; O. Hekster, Emperors and Ancestors. Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition (Oxford, 2015), 242–4.

⁸⁹ Zanker (n. 86), 202–3.

⁹⁰ Ibid.

⁹¹ Hekster (n. 88), 247.

⁹² Zanker (n. 86), 210, 278.

⁹³ Hardie (n. 88), 78.

⁹⁴ Zanker (n. 86), 202–3; A. Rogerson, Virgil's Ascanius. Imagining the Future in the Aeneid (Cambridge, 2017), chap. 2, passim.

⁹⁵ See Grape (n. 10), passim.

⁹⁶ Winkler (n. 46), passim.

⁹⁷ Ibid., 470.

⁹⁸ Heslop (n. 11), 233.

⁹⁹ Although these ‘ghostly’ ships in the Bayeux Tapestry are normally interpreted as a premonition of the Norman invasion fleet, an alternative view is that they could be Harold's navy stationed to defend the south coast (see D. Hill, ‘The Bayeux Tapestry: The Case of the Phantom Fleet’, Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 80.1 [1998], 23–31).

¹⁰⁰ P. Bouet and F. Neveux, ‘Edward the Confessor's Succession According to the Bayeux Tapestry’, in Lewis, Owen-Crocker, and Terkla (n. 2), 59–65.

¹⁰¹ As others have noted: see e.g. Wormald (n. 68), 25–36; H. E. J. Cowdrey ‘King Harold and the Bayeux Tapestry’, in Owen-Crocker (n. 11), 1–18, although Cowdrey stresses that the Tapestry presents a less favourable view of Harold as well.

¹⁰² Dodwell (n. 51), 47.

¹⁰³ Cowdrey (n. 100), 8–9. He offers the suggestion that this is the correct title to use for William because he has not yet been crowned king in the Tapestry narrative, however, he also notes that the retention of rex for Harold indicates that the Tapestry holds him in respect.

¹⁰⁴ Bouet and Neveux (n. 100), 65.

¹⁰⁵ See also Heslop (n. 11), 242–3, for the ‘cultural baggage’ the Anglo-Saxons would have brought to viewing the Bayeux Tapestry and the Old English Hexateuch.

¹⁰⁶ Cf. Tyler (n. 8), 8, whose later dating does not appear to take into account William of Jumièges’ depiction of Antenor as a traitor, not found in the Aeneid (see further below).

¹⁰⁷ Buchthal (n. 35), 1. See also Spence, S., ‘Felix Casus: The Dares and Dictys Legends of Aeneas’, in Farell, J. and Putnam, M. C. J. (eds.) A Companion to Vergil's Aeneid and Its Tradition (London, 2010), 135–6Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁸ Tyler (n. 8), 9; Baswell (n. 23), 19.

¹⁰⁹ Baswell (n. 23), 18–19.

¹¹⁰ Spence (n. 107), 135.

¹¹¹ Dares Phyrgius, de excidio Troiae, 5.17; Dictys Cretensis, Ephemeris de bello Troiano, 41; Baswell (n. 23), 18–19; Spence (n. 107), 137. For a comprehensive discussion of the presence of the ‘un-hero Aeneas’ in Greek and Roman works, see Reinhold, M., ‘The Unhero Aeneas’, C&M 27 (1966), 195–207Google Scholar. Reinhold treats Dares and Dictys at 201–7, noting that Dares Phrygius’ version was more popular than Dictys’ in the western part of the medieval West, likely because of the propensity to claim Trojan ancestors (204).

¹¹² Tyler (n. 8), 8.

¹¹³ Spence (n. 107), 140.

¹¹⁴ See van Houts 1992 (n. 33), xxxii–xxxv, for the dating of the Gesta Normannorum Ducum. William of Poitiers does not seem to have known this traitorous version of Aeneas, however, as he compares Duke William to the hero in order to praise him, as noted above.

¹¹⁵ See Baswell (n. 23), 18, for the term.