| More information : The MARY ROSE, a carrack-type warship of King Henry VIII's Tudor navy, was laid down on 29 January 1510, launched in July 1511, and was completed in 1512. Substantially rebuilt in 1536, armed with new types of heavy guns that could fire through the recently invented gun-ports, she was one of the largest ships in the English navy through more than three decades of intermittent war (against France, Scotland and Brittany), and one of the earliest examples of a purpose-built sailing warship. MARY ROSE sank during action while leading the attack on the galleys of a French invasion fleet on 19 July 1545, and was lost in the Solent, the strait north of the Isle of Wight. (31)
The wreck was located in 1971 and was raised on 11 October 1982 by the Mary Rose Trust. The surviving section of the hull and thousands of artefacts were recovered and are now on display in the Mary Rose Museum in Portsmouth. The Mary Rose site is designated under the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 by statutory instrument 1974/55.
DESIGNATED WRECK SITE - MARY ROSE
Wreck Site and Archaeological Remains:
Summary:
Site and remains of the MARY ROSE, one of King Henry VIII's warships, which foundered in 1545.
Designation History:
Designation Order: February 5th, 1974; 1974 No 1; 1974/55
Protected Area: within 300m radius of position 50 45.48N, 001 06.10W.
Visit by Government Diving Contractor:
University of St Andrews - Archaeological Diving Unit (ADU) April 1986 - April 2003
1990, 1992, 1994, 1998, 1999
Wessex Archaeology 1st May 2003
Modern archaeological history:
In the winter of 1964-65 Alexander McKee became interested in locating sites in the Solent, as a result Project Solent Ships came into being with fellow members of Southsea Sub Aqua Club. Among the vessels targeted were the ROYAL GEORGE (1782), BOYNE (1795) and the MARY ROSE (1545). (6)(7)(18)
Following the discovery of the ROYAL GEORGE, McKee carried out sweep searches in a north-east arc from the site without success. The search was then moved half a mile to the north-east and a test dig carried out which suggested a whole ship could easily be buried in those conditions, and the search was abandoned until sonar instruments could be used.
There could be more archaeological material on the site where the MARY ROSE lay. The stem and bowcastle have not been recovered. The potential of the area is high enough for it to remain a protected wreck site. (11)(12)(13)
In 1969 a trial trench was begun which was carried on in 1970 using water jets in an area where sub-bottom sonar showed an anomaly. Several pieces of oak, a plank, a staghorn and a large cleat were recovered. The barrel of an iron gun made from a single plate of wrought iron with an iron ball in the breech were also recovered. (8)(18)
The plans for 1971 were changed when it was discovered that seabed scour had uncovered part of the frames of the hull which were protruding 3-4". Work continued to determine how much of the vessel remained. It was estimated that 30ft of hull remained and that some internal timbers had collapsed but were in good condition. A second iron gun was recovered with a stone cannon ball. Oak and elm timbers recovered were in good condition and the planking tight with preserved treenails; it was therefore thought possible to raise the vessel. (8)(18)
Distinct mounds covered the southern, northern and eastern side of the vessel thought to be the bow, stern and port side. The frames along the western side of the ship were surveyed and a shallow excavation undertaken at the southern end.This revealed a continuation of frames and vertical planking across the transom of the ship which seems to lie on a northerly heading. The hull is carvel built while the castle is clinker constructed. A number of small finds have been made in the collapsed castle structure, ranging from twentieth century debris to a pewter flagon, stone shot and a wooden handle of a kidney dagger. (9)
Some 800 timbers were removed from the wreck before she was raised. The rigging elements recovered from the MARY ROSE are the earliest known and are a variety of single and double blocks. (5)(18)
Many cannon and stone cannon balls have been recovered. Most of the remains are either undergoing conservation by the Mary Rose Trust or are housed in the Mary Rose Museum, Portsmouth. (18)
1997: ADU bathymetric survey. (18)
1999: Isometric and bathymetric surveys attached to ADU report. (18)
2002: An excavation licence was granted to A Hildred. This year marked the 20th anniversary of the raising of the Mary Rose. A three-month season was planned on the site, but funding negotiations fell through at the last minute. However a five-year plan for archaeological investigations was produced in response to the proposed development of Portsmouth Harbour by the Ministry of Defence to accommodate large aircraft carriers. (16)(18)
Anchor raised on 11-OCT-2005. (17)
Latest information on the MARY ROSE Trust website. (19)
Report produced April 2006. In 2002 the Ministry of Defence (MoD) proposed a deep-water channel to accommodate two new aircraft carriers, whose preferred route cut into the eastern section of the designated circle. A Project Design was drafted and an excavation licence granted, funded by the MoD, and work continued into the 2004 season. The MoD has now proposed two new routes for the channel which do not impact on the designated circle.
The MoD continued to fund the 2005 season, including the raising of an anchor and the stem post by the Mary Rose Trust, and backfilling on the site, both phases being visited by Wessex Archaeology. The Mary Rose Trust placed a new timber sample monitoring station down in 2004 after uncovering timber containing a previously-unrecorded type of worm larvae. Monitoring on the site will continue but no intrusive work is currently planned. (21)
Environmental and Archaeological Remains:
The site was excavated from 1971 until 1982 culminating in the raising of the vessel's hull and is currently being conserved and displayed at the Mary Rose Museum in Portsmouth along with a selection of recovered artefacts.
Fragments of the wreck remain on the seabed along with the spoil heaps and a large indentation left when the hull was raised.
Current issues concerning the wreck include sediment filling in the indentation; possible illegal fishing and natural erosion tending to expose the remaining archaeology. (18)
Finds:
Droit A/4503 - 4 large stone cannonballs, 2 lengths of rope and a small wooden wedge recovered from this wreck, Solent. (14)
Droit 188/04 - A 100mm stone shot was recovered along with numerous other items, a list is held on the Marine and Coastguard Agency file. (15)
Droit 066/05 - A cannonball and one possible piece of shot believed to come from the area of the MARY ROSE wreck site. (20)
Droit 231/05 - Numerous artefacts, including the bow anchor and stern, recovered from the bow section of the MARY ROSE site. (20)
The raised portion of the wreck is now displayed in the new purpose-built Mary Rose Museum, Portsmouth, as at May 2013, following completion of conservation work on the vessel since 1982. (25)
Wreck Event and Documentary Evidence:
Documentary History:
Background History:
The MARY ROSE appeared on the Roll of King's Ships made by Anthony Anthony for Henry VIII. Apart from a drawing of the vessel it gives details of her crew, armament, and ammunition. (4)
The 1514 inventory of the MARY ROSE listed some 63 brass sheaves in use in the ship, mostly in the rigging. The rig had a main topgallant sail and also a main mizzen topsail. Masons, bricklayers and plumbers were used in the construction and installation of the brick cooking hearth. The weapons inventory included hand weapons as well as cannon, including bows, arrows, bills (poles), hacbusshes (musket), lead pellets, pikes and leg and body armour. (5)
In October 1517 the vessel was recaulked by 23 caulkers and carpenters. (5)
Built: 1509 (3); 1512 (31)
Laid down: 29 January 1510 (31)
Launched: July 1511 (31)
Rebuilt: 1539 (3); 1536 (31)
Tonnage: 700 tons; 500 (700-800 after 1536) (31)
Vice Admiral: Sir George Carew
Captain: Roger Grenville
Crew: 100 or 200 mariners, 185 or 200 soldiers, 20 or 30 gunners (7); on board 500 (24); 200 sailors, 185 soldiers, and 30 gunners (31)
Armament: 78-91 guns (wrought iron and cast bronze guns, including anti-personnel weapons) (31)
Breadth: 37 ft (5)
Draught: 15ft (5)
Keel: 105ft (5)
Primary sources relating to the wreck event:
1255.
23 July 1545. Russell to Paget . . . . Laments the unhappy chance of the Mary Rose, with such rashness and negligence cast away; which is a great loss of the men and the ship, although Paget gives some hope of the ship's being recovered.' (22)
'Towards evening the ship MARRY ROSE of Vice-Admiral George Carew foundered, all the 500 men on board being drowned save about 25 or 30 servants, sailors and the like. Was told by a Fleming among the survivors that when she heeled over with the wind the water entered by the lowest row of gun ports which had been left open after firing. They expect to recover the ship and guns.' (24)
Secondary sources relating to the wreck event:
In 1545 she went into battle against the French off Spithead but as she turned towards them she capsized and took down her captain, Sir George Carew, and almost all of her crew, the popularly accepted explanation being that her gunports were left open, but other contempory sources point to insubordination. Long and costly efforts were made to raise her to no avail. (1)(18)
Documentary evidence relating to contemporary salvage:
Venetian salvage contractors Petre de Andreas and Symone de Maryne worked into August trying to raise the wreck, which was keeled on her port side with the masts and yards well out of the water. The classic method of stationing two hulks on either side and running cables underneath the hull and using the rising tide to lift the vessel while lightening her was used. By August 5th her sails and sail yards had been removed and brought ashore, but the angle of the keel meant the attempt failed. Subsequently some guns were salvaged from her by an Italian diver called Peter Paul. (4)(18)
Documentary evidence relating to early archaeological salvage:
In 1836 John Deane was asked by five Gosport fishermen, John Henry Richard, William Burnett, Jas Richard, Job Redman and William Burnett Jr to clear an obstruction on the bottom and as a result a number of cannon were recovered, the first on the 16th June, including a 68pdr cannon royal, 9pdr culverin bastard and a 32 pdr demi-cannon and a large wrought iron gun and part of a smaller similiar gun. (4)(5)(6)(18)
A crater caused by exploding six 13" shells allowed timber to be removed and sold at auction; it was in excellent condition and the souvenirs made from it are still well preserved. (7)
In the 1840s divers from the Royal Engineers were to salvage material from the ROYAL GEORGE but misread the position. As a consequence, five brass cannon were raised bearing the date 1535, along with twenty iron guns.The iron guns were breech loaders, not used in the Royal Navy until Victorian times. (2)
On the 5th September 1840 a brass culverin 17pdr calibre along with four 32pdrs constructed of wrought iron bars and hoops and several smaller guns were recovered. Two archers' bows made of yew and a Cologne-ware jug were also recovered. On the 30th October two more large iron guns were recovered before operations ceased for the season. (4)
The remains of the MARY ROSE, of which only part of a gun and some fragments of timber were visible when first found, may at times have been completely covered up. (4)
Current Interpretation:
Channel 4 programme "The Sinking of the MARY ROSE" broadcast as part of the "Secrets of the Dead" strand on 21-AUG-2000, attributing the loss partly to poor design on having been rebuilt, and partly to being overloaded with men, causing the vessel to capsize, although the gunports were also cited as a possible factor.
Channel 5 programme, "The Ghosts of the Mary Rose" attributes the loss of the vessel to poor communication. Forensic examination of the dead revealed that the composition of their teeth was consistent with an origin in southern Europe, and that they may therefore have been mercenaries, and owing to language difficulties, may not have understood the order to close the gun ports. (23)
Article on "Landmark Listings", alluding to the fact that the MARY ROSE is an unusual wreck site, with a presence both on land (in the museum) and under the water (the designated site). (26)
Parallels on the loss of the MARY ROSE drawn with later behaviour aboard later ships and wrecks: lack of linguistic competence may not necessarily have been a factor, rather a lack of training among mercenaries and non-sailing personnel, since English speakers are known to have rapidly acquired sufficient knowledge to obey orders aboard Swedish barques of the 20th century (such as the HERZOGIN CECILIE, 832170), while the experience of the PRINCESS ALICE (896332) suggests that mass panic could also have been a factor. (27)
Additional sources:
Diver: numerous articles including:
1978, No4, p167, No 6, p 275.
1979, No 1, p12-13, No 3, p 11, No 5, p5, No 9, p31, No 10, 12-13.
1980, No 1, p 29, No 4, p 25, No 7, p 29, No 8, p 27, No 9, p 15-17, No 10, p 18-20, No 11, p 28, No 12, p 28.
1981, No 1, 25, No 3, p 31, No 9. p 21-23, No 10, p 28.
1982, No 2, p 27, No 3, p 35, No 8, 32, No 10, p 11, No 11, p16-19, p 20-21. No 12, p 28.
1992, No 11, p 46-48
PRO: WO/44/282, WO/44/613
How we found the Mary Rose, McKee, 1982
The Story of the Mary Rose, Bradford, 1982
The Mary Rose, the Excavation and raising of Henry VIII's flagship, Rule, 1982
The burials from King Henry VIII's ship Mary Rose, an interim statement, Stirland, 1984, Palaeopathology Newsletter No 47, 7-10
The Mary Rose's complement, Howard, 1985 Mariners Mirror, p71, 1.86
Secrets from a time ship, Readers Digest Turner 1982, 120,719;66-73
Analytical study of Composite shot from the Mary Rose, Rule, Hildred, Dunham, Walker, 1989, 23.2; 84-90
The King's ship: a study in strategic ordnance, Hildred, IJNA 17.1:55
Historic Shipwrecks of England, p 14-17
The Mary Rose site - geophysical evidence for palaeo-scour marks. IJNA 1997, 26.1, p 3-16
|