The Mary Rose<\/em> had been Henry\u2019s pride and joy. It was one of the first ships he had commissioned as king in 1510 and the ship\u2019s captain, Vice Admiral George Carew, was a favourite of Henry\u2019s \u2013 they had even dined together the night before.<\/p>\n Its lifetime almost entirely mapped Henry\u2019s dramatic reign. From the moment he assumed the throne in 1509, \u2028Henry had harboured ambitions to grow English power on the international stage. He soon sent out a message of aggressive intent by ordering the construction of two huge warships: the Peter Pomegranate<\/em> and the Mary Rose<\/em>.<\/p>\n The following three decades were marked by bloodshed and diplomatic spats as Henry jostled with his European neighbours. Then, in 1542\u201343, tensions reached boiling point when he made a pact with the Holy Roman Emperor<\/a>, Charles V, to go to war with France.<\/p>\n In 1544 Henry amassed a huge invasion fleet. But then came a setback: at the last moment, Charles backed out.<\/p>\n Henry\u2019s troops were left abandoned at Calais, with little hope of taking Paris, so instead they successfully laid siege to Boulogne. It wasn\u2019t long before King Francis I of France sought to avenge this defeat. And his attempts to exact that revenge would have fatal consequences for the Mary Rose<\/em>.<\/p>\n By 1545, the French ruler had assembled a 225-strong fleet of ships on the eastern end of the Isle of Wight, ready to invade England \u2013 and he planned to take Portsmouth first. With most of Henry\u2019s men away defending his new territory in France, the king and his realm were in a vulnerable position. On 19 July, the French launched their attack.<\/p>\n During the afternoon, the vessel, part of an English fleet that was much smaller than its French counterpart, made its final manoeuvre across the Solent. The Mary Rose<\/em> then sailed towards the French ready to engage and likely fired its guns, before turning to port and heading towards the shallow waters of Spitbank. It was then that it met its fate.<\/p>\n The battle of the Solent \u2013 as the clash between the English and French forces is known \u2013 raged on after the Mary Rose<\/em>\u2019s sinking. Following a series of naval skirmishes and fighting on the Isle of Wight, the French invasion was ultimately prevented. Yet, with Henry\u2019s prized warship now lying on the seabed, a huge shadow was cast over the king\u2019s moment of triumph.<\/p>\n So what doomed the Mary Rose<\/em>? This is a question I\u2019ve been discussing with a series of historians and maritime experts for a \u2028new podcast series, The Mary Rose: Secrets \u2028of a Tudor Warship<\/a>. <\/em>Here, I\u2019ll explore six leading theories as to what sent the mighty vessel to the bottom \u2028of the sea.<\/p>\n The only confirmed eyewitness account from onboard the ship comes via the ambassador of the Holy Roman Emperor, Fran\u00e7ois van der Delft. In a letter to Charles V on 24 July 1545, he claims \u2028to share the testimony of an unnamed Flemish man \u201camongst the survivors\u201d of the wreck, who stated that the Mary Rose<\/em> \u201cheeled over with the wind\u201d and that \u201cwater entered by the lowest row of gun ports which had been left open after firing\u201d. There is also archaeological evidence that the gun port lids on both sides \u2028of the ship were open when it sank. Could flooding and a sudden gust of wind have combined to set off a fatal \u2028chain of events?<\/p>\n If water flooding the gun ports was a risk, wouldn\u2019t experienced sailors have known to close them? \u201cIn the heat of the moment, things do go wrong,\u201d says Christopher Dobbs, one of the original diving team who helped salvage the Mary Rose<\/em>. \u201cMany people will remember the sinking of the MS Herald<\/em> of Free Enterprise<\/em> in 1987, where the bow doors were left open \u2013 unfortunately, sometimes it\u2019s a case of human error.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s also been suggested that, when it sank, the Mary Rose<\/em>\u2019s mainsail was upwards and flapping in the wind, leading those onshore to attribute its demise to unruly weather. However, according to geographer and battle of the Solent expert Dr Dominic Fontana, that was probably for good reason. \u201cIf you\u2019re trying to stop a ship from sinking,\u201d he says, \u201cthe first piece of advice is to stop. \u2028If not, more water is pushed into the ship.\u201d Cutting lines to the sail, causing it to fly up the yardarm, was one way \u2028to do this.<\/p>\n While the Solent can be unpredictably choppy, the chances of a gust of wind being precisely timed and monumentally large enough to blow over a warship on a hot summer\u2019s day is unlikely. Could the Mary Rose<\/em> have been sinking for an entirely different reason already?<\/p>\n The man in command of the Mary Rose<\/em> \u2028that fateful day was Sir George Carew, an aristocrat who had been appointed vice admiral the day before the sinking. Carew was undoubtedly on good terms with \u2028Henry\u00a0VIII but, according to some sources, \u2028he didn\u2019t enjoy such warm relations with the Mary Rose<\/em>\u2019s crew. So could onboard tensions have contributed to the ship\u2019s demise? One biography of George Carew\u2019s brother, Peter, records how their uncle, Gawain, was passing by on another ship. Concerned by the Mary Rose<\/em>\u2019s unstable condition, he called to George, who replied, in alarm: \u201cI have the sort of knaves I cannot rule.\u201d<\/p>\n This claim of an unruly crew may have been made to protect the Carew family name. What seems certain is that the ship was chiefly manned by long-serving mariners (in fact, Peter Carew himself goes on to state how experienced they were). So it is possible that the crew may have simply ignored or gone against commands they disagreed with \u2013 for better or for worse.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, another theory is that the sailors were suffering from dysentery and were quite simply physically incapable of fulfilling their roles effectively.<\/p>\n There is also research that has suggested that because some of the crew probably \u2028spoke languages other than English, they didn\u2019t understand the commands being \u2028given. In recent years, the remains of \u2028a group of crew members have been analysed.<\/p>\n \u201cTaking a sample of around eight to ten, we discovered that two people were \u2028of African descent,\u201d explains historian Dr Onyeka Nubia. \u201cFinding even one such person would have shocked many people, but my conclusion is that perhaps between one and two thirds of the Mary Rose<\/em> crew were non-English born.\u201d<\/p>\n While it\u2019s possible that some of the men didn\u2019t understand English, it\u2019s unlikely to be the cause of the sinking. After all, it was commonplace in the English fleet for crews of this time to have foreign mercenaries, seamen or even pilots on board.<\/p>\n A few years after the sinking, Hall\u2019s Chronicle reported that the Mary Rose<\/em> \u201cwas laden with much ordinaunce, and the portes left open, which were low, & the great ordinaunce unbreached, so that when the ship should turne, the water entered, and sodainly she sanke\u201d. To understand if this was likely, we have to look at the wider context. Traditionally, an English monarch would requisition vessels to transport men to fight land battles, but Henry was keen to build up his \u201carmy by sea\u201d with a revolutionary new weapon: gunships. \u201cThis was really important for naval architecture, particularly the evolution of lidded gun ports,\u201d says Christopher Dobbs.<\/p>\n These lids could be shut when not in use, so ships could sink lower in the waterline and house larger and heavier guns. However, the suggestion that the ship sank because its gun ports were too low has been discounted.<\/p>\n In 2007 it emerged that Henry had asked for heavy bronze guns to be positioned in the front of some of his ships, including the Mary Rose<\/em>. In response, the ship\u2019s master shipwright and surveyor observed that this would result in a \u201cgreat weakening to the ship at this point\u201d. This is exactly where the stem of the ship had separated from the rest of the hull. Had the Mary Rose<\/em> been compromised by the king\u2019s request?<\/p>\n Or was the warship burdened with other weight? The captain\u2019s brother claimed that there were as many as 700 men on board \u2013 an unusually high number to take into combat. However, the cook\u2019s log included a detailed provision list for only 500 men. (A recent reassessment suggests we have the remains of 300 of these.)<\/p>\n The \u201cheavy load\u201d theory has sparked other suggestions. Sir John Oglander, a 17th-century politician, claimed that \u2028Henry VIII dined on the Mary Rose the night before the battle, and that when he left, all those on board rushed to one side to see him go. Untied ordnance slipped, unbalancing the ship, and water flooded in through the gun ports. Dramatic? Yes. Likely? No. Despite the widespread belief that the Mary Rose sank on \u2028its maiden voyage, it had had a 34-year career beforehand that saw it travel many hundreds of miles, predominantly transporting troops and patrolling England\u2019s coasts (including seeing off pirates). After so long at sea, it does seem unlikely that its design was the main cause of its sinking, especially as the Mary Rose<\/em> had won much praise.<\/p>\n Following a brief stint as a warship, it took an unlikely role as Admiral Edward Howard\u2019s racing yacht in 1513. He challenged his fleet to race around the coast of Kent, and despite being almost four miles behind some of the lead vessels at the start, the Mary Rose<\/em> went on to win. The admiral praised his swift flagship in a subsequent letter to the king, calling it not just \u201cthe noblest ship of sail\u201d but \u201cthe flower of all ships that ever sailed\u201d. Perhaps he was flattering Henry VIII, but the Mary Rose<\/em>\u2019s capability clearly left quite an impression on the admiral.<\/p>\nWhen did the Mary Rose sink?<\/h2>\n
![\"""\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2022\/10\/Kester-Mary-Rose-Cowdray-300dpi-0d1ecba.jpg?quality=90&resize=620%2C413"\" "\\"\"\"\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>Why did the Mary Rose sink? Six possible theories\u2026<\/h2>\n
Could a rogue gust could have caused the ship to capsize?<\/h3>\n<\/div>
Were communication issues and an unruly crew to blame?<\/h3>\n<\/div>
Did the Mary Rose<\/em> take to the waters with too many guns and men?<\/h3>\n<\/div>
![\"""\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2022\/10\/Alamy-DM1MD6-aa2be43.jpg?quality=90&resize=620%2C413"\" "\\"\"\"\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>Was the Mary Rose<\/em> simply unfit for battle?<\/h3>\n<\/div>
![\""Pod\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2022\/10\/Pod-Mary-Rose-series-Sq-f02907e.jpg?quality=45&resize=556,556"\" "\\"\"Pod\\"\/")
<\/div><\/div> <\/div> <\/section><\/body><\/html>\n