Interview with Dr. Sheona Shankland (PhD Researcher, Lancaster University Medical School, U.K.), and Dr. Alex Hildred (Head of Research at the Mary Rose Trust, U.K.)

Tell us about the Mary Rose, its history and its fate.

Dr. Alex Hildred: Within a year of Henry VIII ascending the throne in 1509, he signed a warrant for the building of two new ships, one of these was to become the Mary Rose, and for a large part of his reign Mary Rose was the flagship of his expanding fleet. During the life of the ship, huge advances were made in gunpowder weapons (reflected in three inventories we have for her, and also identified in adaptations to the hull).

There were only two documented sea battles during this time: Brest in 1512, the Mary Rose’s debut, and the Battle of the Solent in 1545, her final battle, both against the French. In July 1545, a large French invasion fleet entered the Solent. During most of the day there was little wind, and the fleets lay at anchor. However, the French had an advantage: Italian rowed galleys. These could advance against the English fleet, engaging their powerful long range and bow-mounted bronze guns.

Late in the day, the wind came up and the fleets advanced towards each other. The best eyewitness account states that the Mary Rose fired from one side of the ship and turned to bring the guns on her other side to bear and sank. The French account states that they sank her. Other suggestions for why the ship sank include a gust of wind, gunports that were either too low or left open after firing, an over-gunned, over-manned, unstable ship, a foreign crew not understanding orders, or a disobedient crew led by an inexperienced captain.

Regardless of the cause, she rolled on to her starboard side and water entered through the open gunports. With few access points between decks, and a heavy net spread across the open upper deck, the 500 men were trapped on board. Those stationed on the uppermost decks within the bow and stern castles, or in the rigging, were the only survivors.

Attempts were made to pull the ship upright immediately, by attaching ropes to each of her four masts and using large capstans to try and pull her upright, but this failed and resulted in breaking her foremast. Attempts also failed to pull her into shallower water. Divers were engaged to recover ordnance (guns) and anchors, with final payments to salvors in 1547.

An accidental net snagging caught on a timber in 1836, and a bronze gun was found close by.  This identified the wreck. The site was worked on by commercial salvage divers on and off until 1840. In the mid 1960’s, a military historian and scuba diver local to Hampshire (Alexander McKee) created a project to look for known historic wrecks in the Solent. Through historical research, intensive searching of the seabed, and use of the (then) most modern technology to look for shipwrecks beneath the seabed (sub-bottom profiling), an anomaly was found. In 1971 the first timbers of the wreck were discovered. Between ‘71 and ’78, discrete trenches were placed to define the amount and orientation of the ship. This suggested that a significant portion of the starboard side was intact, with remains of the hold and four decks. In early 1979 the Mary Rose Trust was formed with the aim of completely emptying the ship and raising her.  

What first drew you to study the sailors who died on the Mary Rose?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: As an anatomist who also works in archaeology, studying the sailors of the Mary Rose was a wonderful opportunity. The remarkable preservation provides an excellent avenue for research into the human skeleton and the technique of Raman spectroscopy is non-destructive, meaning researchers can learn a lot whilst also respecting and preserving these human skeletal remains.

Dr. Alex Hildred: I helped supervise the underwater excavation and my area included the largest concentration of human remains. I provided the archaeological (contextual) information to the osteoarcheologist (Ann Stirland) from 1983. She was sorting the co-mingled remains into individual skeletons. I have continued to facilitate the work on human remains since then.

How did you choose to investigate them in the study, and why?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: The clavicles (collarbones) are valuable for age estimation because they have unique characteristics relating to development and growth that occur at reasonably predictable stages in life. Using Raman spectroscopy allowed us to build on what is known at a gross level by investigating the chemistry of the clavicle. As the clavicles reside on the left and right side of the body, investigating the effects of handedness with ageing was also possible.

Dr Alex Hildred: Clavicles are the last bone to fuse in the human skeleton. There were enough pairs of clavicles from partially reconstructed individuals representing different age groups.
 

What are the key findings from your research?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: The two main components of bone are protein and mineral, with protein providing bone with flexibility and resistance to fracture, and mineral providing strength, rigidity and resistance to compression. In this study we found that bone mineral increased with ageing and bone protein decreased, with the mineral increase being more substantial than the protein decrease.

Dr. Alex Hildred: From an archaeological perspective, identifying increased mineralization with age and differences in this between paired clavicles. With a co-mingled assemblage, this suggests that bone chemistry for pairing certain bones is not straightforward.

Your research suggests handedness influenced the clavicle bone chemistry of sailors on the Mary Rose, why do you think that is?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: In medieval times, when the individuals in this study were alive, being right handed was seen as the only option due to the negative associations of being left handed. As such, we could investigate the chemical changes with ageing in the context of handedness. In favoring one side during activity, the increased exertion led to more pronounced bone chemistry changes with age in the dominant side.

What most surprised or interested you about your findings?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: Finding a correlation with handedness in the age-related changes of the clavicle. This is a crucial consideration for showing how handedness could influence fracture risk.

Dr. Alex Hildred: The association of increased mineralization and handedness.

What do you hope your findings might lead to, and what are the next steps for your research?

Dr. Sheona Shankland: I hope these findings lead to a greater consideration of bone chemistry when studying the ageing skeleton. It is clear that the underlying chemistry changes with ageing, and that behaviors effect the bone chemistry too. Next, it would be great to investigate other bones, to build a picture of changes through the entire skeleton. Also, investigating the significant roles on board the Mary Rose, such as the archers, to see the influence of distinctive physical activity on the bone chemistry.

Dr. Alex Hildred: From an archaeological perspective, I think it would be interesting use Raman spectroscopy to investigate the clavicles and radii of the individuals we think may have been archers. Left handedness in archers was strongly discouraged. Research has suggested that the radii on the bow arm takes most stress during the seconds before the arrow is released, reflected in a larger cross section. Investigating the ratio of mineral to protein in pairs of radii  thought to belong to archers would be  an interesting project.

Interview edited by PLOS staff for clarity and concision.