Ship sail

Mary Rose Breakthrough: Henry VIII’s Favorite Ship “Six Minutes To Be Saved” | Sciences | New

Archaeologists stunned by ‘important’ burial found in British grave

The Mary Rose was one of the largest ships in the English navy, serving more than three decades in several wars against France, Scotland and Brittany. Widely regarded as King Henry VIII’s favorite warship, it rested on the Solent seabed for over 400 years until it was raised 39 years ago. The remains of the hull have been on display at the historic Portsmouth Shipyard since the mid-1980s, serving as a Tudor-era time capsule for tens of thousands of visitors each year. However, after being buried in the silt for so long, many artifacts became extremely sensitive to exposure to air after being recovered.

A 34 year conservation project, with the third phase – a controlled air drying process – ending in 2016.

A new documentary, ‘Skeletons of the Mary Rose: The New Evidence’, will air Saturday night at 7 p.m. on Channel 4.

After a new scientific investigation of the crew of the warship, the history of Tudor will be redefined.

One thing that has never really been confirmed is how it sank, due to conflicting testimony and a lack of conclusive evidence to prove the various stories.

Now retired academic Dominic Fontana analyzed various clues as to how the ship may have met its destiny while writing for The Conversation in 2016.

READ MORE: Archeology breakthrough as rare Roman mosaic found in UK field

The Mary Rose is currently on display at the historic Portsmouth Shipyard. (Image: GETTY)

Marie rose

The Mary Rose was discovered in 1971 and bred in 1982. (Image: GETTY)

Mr. Fontana was employed by the Mary Rose Trust from 1983 to 1987 and worked as a Lecturer in Geography at the University of Portsmouth.

The first myth he debunked was that the Mary Rose experienced disaster on her maiden voyage, as she sailed the Solent from Portsmouth harbor.

An eyewitness, according to Mr Fontana, said the Mary Rose was “blown away by an abnormal gust of wind”, while other contemporary accounts suggested the crew were “incompetent and unwilling to follow orders. “.

More recent accounts suggested that several of the people on board were Spaniards who could not understand the instructions in English, which led to confusion.

Mr Fontana wrote: ‘But these seem to me to be very unsatisfactory reasons for the catastrophic loss of Tudor England’s best ship and, therefore, I have tried to gain a better understanding of the Battle of the Solent and the events that surrounded the loss of the Mary Rose. . “

Mary Rose pistol

One of the weapons recovered from the wreck of the Mary Rose. (Image: GETTY)

He set to work, analyzing the geographic and historical documents of the time. A contemporary painting of the event was also found to be “remarkably useful” as it depicts the entire scene of the battle.

The painting showed the French fleet off the Isle of Wight and the English fleet across the Solent. Henry VIII can also be seen riding towards Southsea Castle.

The Mary Rose is right in the middle of the painting.

Using the image, modern digital mapping technology and a reconstruction of the tidal currents of the day of the battle, he concluded how the opposing fleets would have conducted the battle.

Above all, Mr. Fontana discovered that the current of the Solent was from the west in the morning. With calm and windless waters, the English ships “could not have moved”. They did not have guns that could fire directly forward, only to the port or starboard sides.

DO NOT MISS :
Brian Cox hinted that God’s existence was still on the table [INSIGHT]
Long Valley supervolcano alert as “clues of impending eruption” [QUOTES]
WWII wrecks disappear without a trace [REPORT]

Mary Rose Artifacts

Some of the artifacts recovered from the Mary Rose. (Image: GETTY)

Mr. Fontana writes: “This means that for four in the morning the French would have been favored by the tide, able to send their advanced attack of five galleys directly towards the prows of the English ships without the English being able to easily retaliate.

He said it was “likely that the Mary Rose suffered damage to her bow in the morning”.

He admitted, however, that much of the Mary Rose’s arch had yet to be excavated, so there is no archaeological evidence of such damage.

A damaged bow on its own wouldn’t be too big of a problem, he wrote. However, a considerable amount of water was able to be pumped into her bilge.

By mid-afternoon, a sea breeze was blowing in the Solent, the Mary Rose was able to set sail and head north between 4 p.m. and 5 p.m.

Marie rose

A documentary airs this weekend about a new preview of the Mary Rose. (Image: GETTY)

He wrote: “She continued her passage north, but would have rolled and sailed slowly if she had been hit earlier in the day and shipped water.

“After firing their cannons, the crew of the Mary Rose would have known they were in trouble, feeling the uncomfortable movement of the ship beneath their feet.

“I suspect it was their goal to run aground on Spitbank, just 600 yards before where she sank.

“Six more minutes of sailing and she would have been safe.”

Mr Fontana said the Mary Rose rolled “a little too far and for a little too long” so that the open ports would have sunk into the sea and allowed water to flow onto the main deck.

This, he said, would “have completely destabilized the ship and it would have sunk in seconds.”

About 500 men died when the Mary Rose sank, and only 35 were reportedly saved.

Mr Fontana wrote: “I think the crew of the Mary Rose have been unfairly slandered by previous suggestions about the cause of the sinking.

“No evidence suggests they were incompetent or unruly, and on such a calm day, an abnormal gust of wind seems unlikely.

“But until – or if – the arc is recovered, my theory is only one of many possibilities.”

Skeletons of the Mary Rose: The New Evidence will air Saturday at 7pm on Channel 4. It will also be available on All4.