David Hockney, one of Britain’s most celebrated living artists, has ignited a fierce debate over the fate of the Bayeux Tapestry, calling plans to bring the priceless 11th-century artefact to the UK “madness” and “too big a risk.” The tapestry, which has resided in Bayeux, Normandy for nearly a millennium, is scheduled for a nine-month exhibition at the British Museum in London—a move that has divided heritage experts, artists, and the public on both sides of the Channel.
The Bayeux Tapestry is no ordinary artwork. Stretching 70 metres in length and depicting 58 vivid scenes, it chronicles the dramatic events leading to the Norman conquest of England in 1066. Its wool embroidery, stitched onto fragile linen, brings to life 626 characters and 202 horses, most famously showing William the Conqueror’s fateful victory over Harold Godwinson at the Battle of Hastings. According to The Independent, British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has hailed the tapestry as a “unique treasure,” while British Museum director Nicholas Cullinan described it as “one of the most important and unique cultural artefacts in the world.”
Despite these accolades, Hockney’s objections, published exclusively in The Independent and echoed across media outlets, have struck a chord. “The 58 narrative scenes have been observed in Bayeux for nearly a millennium,” Hockney wrote. “It is madness. I am not afraid to speak up for art. It is something that has defined my life for more than eight decades.” He did not mince words about the risks involved, warning that “while moving the Bayeux Tapestry to the UK might have vanity and symbolic educational value, the physical and environmental risks are substantial.”
Hockney’s primary concern centers on the tapestry’s vulnerability. For centuries, it has been preserved in tightly controlled conditions in France, with careful regulation of temperature, humidity, and light exposure. “The tapestry had survived political upheaval and wars but now faces an unnecessary conservation ordeal,” he argued. According to El Balad, Hockney emphasized that the tapestry’s linen backing has weakened over time, and its wool embroidery threads are particularly susceptible to damage. He warned that “rolling, unrolling, or improper handling during transport could cause irreversible harm.”
Backing Hockney’s fears, more than 40,000 people signed a petition in August 2025 to prevent the tapestry’s journey to London. Art historian Didier Rykner has also voiced concerns that the move could result in irreparable damage. The tapestry, listed among nearly 600 items on UNESCO’s Memory of the World register, has never before left French soil for Britain since its creation in the years following the Battle of Hastings.
The British Museum, for its part, has tried to reassure critics. Its conservation and collections management team, experienced in handling fragile textiles, is working closely with French conservators and specialists to ensure the tapestry’s safe movement. In anticipation of its journey, the tapestry has already been removed from public display and placed in storage, according to El Balad. The UK government has insured the tapestry for a staggering £800 million during the loan period—a figure that underscores both its historical and monetary value, but, as Hockney pointed out, “its actual value is priceless.”
The loan itself is the result of a historic cultural exchange. As the Bayeux Museum in Normandy undergoes renovation, the opportunity arose for the tapestry to travel. In return, British museums are lending some of their own most treasured artifacts to France, including items from the Sutton Hoo Anglo-Saxon burial mounds and the 12th-century Lewis Chessmen. The exchange is intended to foster goodwill and mutual appreciation of each nation’s cultural heritage.
Yet, the controversy has reignited longstanding debates over the movement and ownership of cultural treasures. The British Museum, in particular, faces regular criticism for its possession of artefacts acquired during the colonial era, such as the Elgin Marbles from Greece and the Rosetta Stone from Egypt. Hockney’s intervention comes at a time when questions about the ethics of international art loans—and the responsibilities of museums to protect, rather than endanger, world heritage—are more urgent than ever.
Hockney’s critique extended beyond technical concerns to the motivations behind the loan. He accused the British Museum of being driven by “the vanity of a museum which wants to boast of the number of visitors.” The exhibition is expected to draw millions, a tempting prospect for any institution, but Hockney questioned whether the risk was worth the potential reward. “Is it really worth it?” he asked. “I think not. I suggest it stays, and there is a proper debate about it being moved.”
According to The Independent, this is not the first time Britain has sought to borrow the tapestry. There have been three previous unsuccessful requests, making this agreement—struck during the Bayeux Museum’s renovations—a historic first. The British Museum director, Nicholas Cullinan, has emphasized the importance of the loan, describing the tapestry as “one of the most important and unique cultural artefacts in the world.”
Despite these assurances, the risks outlined by Hockney and conservation experts are daunting. Sudden changes in temperature, humidity, or light exposure can cause the tapestry’s fibres to contract or expand, leading to colour fading, tearing, stitch loss, and distortion of the fabric. Increased exposure during the UK exhibition could further fade its colours and weaken its already fragile structure. “Any movement of the relic’s wool embroidery threads puts it in danger,” Hockney warned, and even the most careful handling cannot guarantee its safety.
The debate extends beyond the practicalities of conservation. It touches on deeper questions of cultural stewardship, national pride, and the value of sharing heritage with a wider audience. Some argue that bringing the tapestry to London would offer millions a once-in-a-lifetime chance to see it up close, fostering greater understanding of shared history between Britain and France. Others, like Hockney, believe that the risks—to both the object and the principle of responsible guardianship—are simply too great.
As the exhibition’s opening date approaches, the question remains: should the world’s most famous tapestry be allowed to travel, or should it remain in its centuries-old home, a silent witness to history? For now, the debate continues, with Hockney’s passionate plea ensuring that the conversation is far from over.
