religious practices on board the mary rose: some observations€¦ · ered in a personal sea chest,...

Proc. Hampshire Field Club Archaeol. Soc. 64, 2009, 132-146 (Hampshire Studies 2009)

RELIGIOUS PRACTICES ON BOARD THE MARY ROSE:SOME OBSERVATIONS

By CATHERINE FLOWER BOND

ABSTRACT

This paper concerns what can be learned of the nature of religious observance on board 16th-century ships. The 'Mary Rose' affords rich evidence on this topic that has been largely neglected, partly to problems of assigning functions to its artefacts. This paper aims to complementEamonDuffy's (1992, 2003) achieve-ments regarding our understanding of parish life on land. It will address issues of heritage interpretation as well as wider questions of historical knowledge by asking basic questions about what religious observ-ance might have entailed on board ship in the 1540s, and by offering thoughts on how some of the artefacts might best be classified. This will aid our understanding of a particularly complex period in which England's Reformation was in process, but the country remained largely Catholic. The paper also sheds light on some of the problems affecting heritage sites when considering exhibitions and the presenta-tion of artefacts.

INTRODUCTION

Readers will be familiar with the Mary Rose'ssinking in the Solent in July 1545 whileengaging the French, and her more recentrecovery through the painstaking efforts ofmany divers and maritime archaeologists suchas Alexander McKee and Margaret Rule. Televi-sion coverage of the ship's recovery from theseabed in 1982, watched by tens of millions ofpeople worldwide, turned the event into inter-national news and the ship itself into a nationaltreasure. Since 1983, many thousands of peoplehave visited the famous Mary Rose exhibitionhoused at Portsmouth Historic Dockyard. They

are largely presented with the image and relicsof a naval man of war, so that military equipmentdominates the narrative rather than the moremundane artefacts which record the day-to-daylives of those on board.

This paper seeks not so much to supplyanswers as to provoke thought. It addresses thedeceptively simple question of the nature ofreligious observance on board the Mary Rosewhen it went down in 1545. The question isstimulating for several reasons. Much is knownabout the nature of the Henrician Reformationon land, thanks largely to the work of EamonDuffy (1992, 2003) and Peter Marshall (1997),yet we know little of religious life on boardship. An enormous number of artefacts havebeen recovered, yet people may not realise thefull range of problems these present for themuseum in terms of their identification, classi-fication and interpretation. The topic addressescurrent interest in the ways in which museumspresent the past to the public, and how theirexhibitions and presentations are fashioned.In today's secular world, religious aspects oflife in the past are often neglected, yet they,too, deserve to be interpreted. This paper willthus discuss the nature of some of the artefactsdiscovered to date and comment on the diffi-culties of their interpretation in a way that mayenhance our understanding of the possiblenature of religious observance on board ship.

The research presented here is located withinthe current historiographical debates sparkedby Duffy and Marshall, among others. Howeverit will chiefly concentrate on building a picturefrom the ship's material culture in answer toour basic questions. The findings should revealthe complexity of the task, the provisional

132

FLOWER BOND: RELIGIOUS PRACTICES ON BOARD THE MARY ROSE: SOME OBSERVATIONS 133

nature of so many of our conclusions, and thedifficulties faced by museum staff. The aim isneither to chronicle religious observance norto analyse it, but to describe and discuss par-ticular religious artefacts discovered from thewreckage. This in itself is no mean task. To dateover 26,000 items have been recovered fromthe seabed (Allen and Gardiner 2005,117-27),and of these only 20 have thus far been clas-sified as possibly of religious significance. Thisgroup consists of rosaries - or more accuratelypaternosters -relics, and a fragment of a book,as well as various religious symbols stamped onequipment.

How can historians make sense of the possiblereligious significance of the artefacts excavatedfrom the Mary Rose? There is currendy noexhibition board in the Mary Rose Museumexplaining the significance of religion in the1540s, although there is a case presenting theactual artefacts with a simple commentary.But the task for the museum keeper and thehistorian should be to explain the significanceof these findings to a larger public. This wasan era dominated by religion, and yet in someturmoil as to the exact nature of religious beliefafter a long period of relative certainty. TheEuropean Reformation had called into doubtexactly how one was saved, the existence ofPurgatory, the balance between the importanceof belief over 'good works', and the efficacy ofthe relic and the talisman. Large fissures wereopening up between what was taught in the uni-versities, promoted by the state, and the beliefsand practices of the ordinary populace. It is thisstory that Eamon Duffy (2003, 32-6) relays somovingly in his story of the village of Morebathin Devon. Religion was the 'glue' which heldsociety together and it was generally thoughtto be vital for the people to share the religionof their monarch- 'God's representative onearth'. The administering of the sacraments,the rites of birth, marriage and death-bed abso-lution were thought officially to acknowledgean individual's 'civil existence'. Without thisvital function they simply did not exist (Linton2000).

All this calls into question what we mightexpect to find on board ship in the 16th

century. Would there have been a priest orchaplain? How would services have beenconducted, and how many? Would communionhave been administered? Thanks to so manyfilms and television documentaries, we are allfamiliar with the ceremonial nature of a burialat sea, but what else might have occurred onboard ship? Would there have been a table setaside to function as an altar? What plates, cupsand chalices would have been carried? Andwhat evidence of piety might we expect to find among sailors' possessions?

CURRENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THERELIGIOUS ARTEFACTS ON BOARD MARYROSE

The official 2005 publication Before the Mast: Life and Death on Board the Mary Rose (Allen andGardiner 2005) lists 26,000 artefacts recoveredfrom the wreck and itemises the many posses-sions, both personal and commercial, ownedby the ship and its crew. The items this projectis most concerned with are those from whichwe can infer 'religious' observance or practice.Andrew Elkerton (Mary Rose Museum: Collec-tions Manager) has admitted, however, that thetask of cataloguing is fraught with difficulties,and that many items remain unidentified.

Much material evidence for acts of privatedevotion survives from the early- to mid- 16thcentury, emphasising not only the commonnature of religious practices but also revealingthat, despite Protestant disapproval of religiousimagery towards the end of that period, privatedevotion was hard to police (Foister 2003, 334-5). As far as the Mary Rose is concerned theoriginal work completed by Mark Redknap, onartefacts considered definitely to be 'religious',was published in Allen and Gardiner (2005,117-27). Twelve objects were itemised whichunquestionably fell into this category, althoughothers had possibilities. These items not onlydisplay the distinct character of Christiandevotion within a closed community, but alsoreflect the religious sentiments of the timeincorporated within the designs appearing inbooks and their leather covers, coins, tankards

134 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

and lids. They include 'paternosters' (rosarybeads) and 'talismans' excavated from crewmembers' cabins and personal 'sea chests'.Most of the items were dispersed through-out the ship, but one collection that is moreambiguous than previously thought is thatwhich was found in the barber surgeon's cabin,and this will be discussed in detail below. Itshould also be noted that the bulk of whathas been found and interpreted to date tellsus only about the religion of individuals, not,alas, about the nature of communal worshipon board ship. Accordingly, this will be a majorfocus of this paper, for the Mary Rose was surelya 'floating parish'.

Patemosterwas a term used in the Middle Agesfor a set of beads, often a symbolic number,threaded onto a cord. They were subdividedinto groups by larger beads usually referred toas 'English Gauds'. The usual formations for thebeads were in decades (ten smaller beads andone larger bead). Eamon Duffy (1992, 70-9)describes variations of five and seven 'decade'beads manufactured from materials which wereconsidered both spiritual and expensive, as ifto reflect the owner's social status. However,others could be made from simple materialslike bone and wood. The string of beads cameto represent 'rosary devotion' and their use as a symbol of piety was first introduced in Colognein 1482, mainly directed at women (CatholicTruth Society 1992, Ch.l). The rosary, however,was also a fashionable item worn around thewaist on a girdle or around the neck.

Paternosters in large numbers were foundon the Mary Rose often still in the pouches thatonce hung from the sailors' belts, sometimesalongside their combs, corresponding withwritten accounts of how paternosters wereworn (Duffy 1992, 79). Indeed paternoster no.81A1414 (Fig. 1) was found in a cabin inside a pouch among a few scattered human remains.This illustrates not only the personal impor-tance of such possessions to crew members,but also, crucially, that it was normal to ownsuch an item in this particular environment.The excavation team found numerous beads ofwood and bone, but also others fashioned fromexpensive materials like jade, coral and lapis

(Allen and Gardiner 2005, 117-27). From thisevidence it may be suggested that the specificmaterials that paternosters were made of couldidentify the social status of the person usingthem, again complementing Duffy's findings(1992, 81). That is, it is possible the crew wereusing wood and perhaps bone beads, whileofficers may have sported the more expensivejade and coral. This is important especially if,as seems to be the case, they were 'on display'hanging from belts and girdles, demonstratingthe wealth and status of the wearer as well as hisreligious inclination.

The conservation team have been able toconstruct seven complete boxwood 'paternos-ters' from the remnants of the finds, and theyestimate from this that many sets of beads wouldhave existed on board. Two sets were found inclose proximity to complete human skeletonsin the carpenter's cabin, and they were alsofound on all decks of the ship. It is noteworthy,however, that only one set of beads was discov-ered in a personal sea chest, suggesting thatthese items would indeed have been carriedby their owners rather than left with otherpersonal items. This evidence, then, appears toimply that the crew openly observed their faith.They were free to display such religious itemsin full public view, despite the perceived threatof Protestantism.

'Talismans' (carved objects with a religioussignificance) were brought to the surface inabundance. Some were in the form of coinsor pieces of bone attached to other religiousartefacts, but for the purpose of this study thebone angels (Fig. 2) are the most revealing.Talismans are used in a similar way to pater-nosters, and are considered to have 'special'powers. Such objects would have served tosharpen and intensify the religious experi-ence (Foister 2003, 334) and their ownerswould have believed in their protective powersduring times of need. To this day, soldiers andsailors in particular still carry talismans insideuniforms and personal belongings (RoyalNaval Chaplain Society 2007), and in manyTudor court paintings the courtiers of HenryVIII (1509-47) and their wives wear medallionsor hat badges bearing images of the Virgin

FLOWER BOND: RELIGIOUS PRACTICES ON BOARD THE MARY ROSE: SOME OBSERVATIONS 1 3 5

8IAI4I4

I Ocm

1J/\ 5 of type

fp I of type

43 of type

I of type

BIE30 i-w.

I I of type

A 7 of type

80A0995

Fig. 1 Boxwood Paternosters (Artefact Nos. 81A1414 and 80A0995)


8IA285I

Fig. 2 Bone Angel (Artefact No. 81A2581)

or other saints (Foister 2003, 335). While a talisman is clearly a matter of individual prefer-ence (indeed the piece at Fig. 2 was discoveredin a personal leather purse inside a chest whichmay signify 'private' or individual devotion)rosaries would have been a reminder of theneed for prayer at various times of the day.

Duffy (1992, 68) has described late-medievaland 16th-century Catholics as carrying supersti-tious items in their clothing. Such items wereoften placed in graves and inside 'caches' inchimneys to protect the household. IndeedFoister (2003, 336) has drawn attention to themultifarious religious images recorded in inven-tories in various household spaces, includingbedrooms, and talismans and iconographiesof the saints were also placed in dark cornersof houses to help protect the inhabitants.

They were also carried in luggage when trav-elling. Some of the other talismans excavatedfrom the Mary Rose, unlike the bone angelsdescribed above, were neither finely carved norexpensive; they were just simple coins, pieces ofcarved wood or animal bone. This suggests thatthe crew member who owned the 'bone angels'was a man of considerable means. More perti-nently, it demonstrates that he believed in theperceived power of the artefact and was, again,observing his personal piety.

Many individual examples of talismans andpaternosters have been found on the ship.However one collection that has hithertoseemed clear-cut and secular may require closeranalysis, with possible religious symbolism inmind. This is the material excavated from thebarber surgeon's cabin; bowls, bottles, syringesand pots of medicine. Not all of these objectsare necessarily for medical use. For examplethe bronze bowl (Fig. 3), called in the museumdisplay a 'bleeding bowl' and thus interpretedas being used by the barber surgeon to 'bleed'patients (Allen and Gardiner 2005, 202), mayhave been categorised as such solely due to itsprovenance. This type of bowl is more oftendocumented in religious settings, reserved forthe use of sacred food. In contrast, the usualbleeding bowls were normally of glazed earthenslip ware, with a notch cut into the side of therim to allow for the arm to be secured, thuspreventing movement. The 'bleeding bowl'in the Mary Rose Museum is made exclusivelyfrom bronze, which would be tainted by bloodif used for bleeding over a long period of time(Royal College of Surgeons 2007). It is also verysmall - probably too small for its presumedpurpose - with no way of securing the patient'sarm.

The barber surgeon's cabin containedanother metal bowl larger in diameter, thistime complete with the tell-tale notch cut tothe side of the rim. This is currently displayedin the museum as a 'shaving bowl'. The BarberSurgeons Society (2007) details bowls of thisnature, made from metal and being used forshaving and bleeding patients. This seems tobe borne out when we learn that many peoplevisited the barber surgeon in the London


80AI625

I Ocm

Fig. 3 Bronze 'bleeding bowl' (Artefact No. 80A1625)

streets for quick and relatively cheap medicaltreatment during the 16th century. In fact theiradvertising 'logo' was a white and red polewith a metal shaving bowl attached to the top.(The white stripes indicated the bandages andthe red stripes the blood.) The bowl signifiedto passers-by that barbers tasks were offered

and that the establishment was also a medicalfacility (Royal College of Surgeons 2007).

It is noteworthy that the traditional bleedingbowls on display in the Victoria and AlbertMuseum's exhibition Birth, Death and Marriage 1500-1700 (July 2006) looked remarkablysimilar to the Mary Rose's 'shaving bowl', and


in most cases were documented as being usedfor both bleeding and shaving patients. Theywere chiefly made of slip ware and had the sig-nificant 'cut' to the rim, with the exception ofone small metal bowl excavated from the foun-dations of an old school in east London (V&AExhibition, July 2006). This particular bowldid, however, have the tell tale 'notch' cut tothe large flat rim exactly like the 'shaving bowl'excavated from the Mary Rose, which suggeststhat the barber surgeon's other bowl, the'bleeding bowl' (see above), may have been mis-interpreted and warrants further investigation.Indeed it is probable that a ship would not bestable enough to allow for continued use of slipware due to inadequate storage and breakagesfrom stormy conditions, so that a metal bowlwould be more suitable for life at sea. However,it would have to be fit for the purpose, and ofthe right dimensions and design for shavingand bleeding, which also seems to rule out thebronze so-called 'bleeding bowl' currently ondisplay at the Mary Rose Museum. So here maybe a good example of a multifunctional itemrecovered from the sea bed, and it may be thatthe barber surgeon's cabin was a storage pointfor more than medical supplies.

ARTEFACTS REQUIRED FOR WORSHIP ATSEA

At this stage it is necessary to consider whatmight have been needed for communal worshipon board ship. This would presumably haverequired a table, suitable fine cloth, napkins, a crucifix, an incense burner, candles and candlesticks, a chalice and a paten. The ship's bellmight also have been tolled to call people toworship. In seeking to answer such questionsartefact items no. 81A1708/1-3 are noteworthy.These are quite elaborate carved oak trestle endsused with a top board which might well havebeen used in communal worship (although theresulting table may also have been set aside forofficers' meals). In the barber surgeon's cabinthere was also a small table structure secured tothe side wall which could be lowered when inuse to place an injured sailor before treatment.

But again, it may have served other functions.This is the only evidence of any kind of tablefound on board the ship (Allen and Gardiner2005,387-9).

As indicated above, it is not suggested herethat the bowls and tables in the barber surgeon'scabin were definitely or exclusively used forreligious purposes. Instead the aim is to prob-lematise our assumptions (which are groundedin modern, secular Western values) and toquestion our resultant definitive interpreta-tion of objects that may have had a pluralityof meanings in the past. But if we have indeedfound tables that may have had multiple uses,what of other evidence of worship? Church plateis notoriously difficult to identify, and here it hasbeen useful to recall visits to museums acrossEurope where such items are displayed. TheMuseum of London (Religion Exhibition 1400-1800, July 2006), for instance, boasts hundredsof examples of church plate and religiousartefacts from the 15th Century onwards whichwere excavated from small churches and 'lay'chapels. Pertinent for this paper, the museumhas various patens and chalices that may becompared with the artefacts excavated fromthe Mary Rose, made from wood, brass, pewterand silver, which are both simple and heavilydecorated. Some pieces incorporate the 'IHS'inscription (lehus Hominum Salvator, Jesus, theSaviour of men/Jerusalem [Hierosolyma]) butothers are not obviously stamped with any dis-tinguishable marks, religious or otherwise.

One piece in particular, a small 14th-centurypaten (a plate used for communion bread)appeared to be made of brass, and was devoid ofinscriptions. It was found in inner London, andlooks remarkably similar to some of the smallerpewter plates found on the Mary Rose. Highaltar examples of plate were very ornate, butthose from smaller churches or lay chapels wereindeed very simple and quite small, perhaps foreasier storage. This could suggest that religiousitems for pre-Reformation domestic chapelsmight have been very simple and not inscribed,thus causing confusion for categorising earlyforms of church equipment used on the MaryRose.

In the context of this paper, the most interest-


Fig. 4 'Bronze brazier' (Artefact No. 80A1626)

ing item in the Museum of London's exhibition small, oddly shaped glass and metal botdes withwas a 16th-century leather case containing a traces of oils (Allen and Gardiner 2005,190-1)small glass bottle, chalice and paten which could that were kept with various types of pewter warebe carried or packed in luggage for travel. It inside the barber surgeon's medicine chest andwas recovered from a church in Cheapside with cabin. These smaller items of pewter may havesimilar items in a poor state of repair-Similarly, formed part of a communion set, and couldthe Mary Rose excavations recovered several have been used with the vials of water and


oil, thus serving as a portable Mass set whichcould be used for both travel and for use onboard. Christopher Hibbert (1987,186-93) hassuggested that early-modern clerics would haveowned small cases in order to carry items toenable them to perform the Mass in domesticcontexts, where they were employed underlicence to officiate. This licence allowed themto baptise the family, give services, receive con-fession and officiate the Mass which would takeplace in the family chapel or in another des-ignated part of the house. Portable Mass casesare still in use today (Rev. Dr. Michael Brydon,pen. coram.) and remain very similar to that ondisplay in the Museum of London.

The Mary Rose has tangible evidence of someof the components appearing in the Museumof London's leather case, such as a small bottleand pewter flask containing the residue ofoils that may have been used for 'anointing'the crew, and several pieces of the correct-sized pewter which perhaps acted as a chaliceand paten. They were found inside the barbersurgeon's medicine chest (Allen and Gardiner2005, 190-5) and in his quarters, but unfortu-nately not in a separate leather case or woodenbox that would serve as a carrier (although themedicine chest would have been a convenientplace to keep sacred items). All this remainsspeculation, but the argument is strength-ened because the barber surgeon's assemblagealso included the shaving and bleeding bowls(above). The herbal medicine located in thesame chest contained residues of plant-basedoils such as frankincense and grape seed oils(Allen and Gardiner 2005, 189) that werecommonly used in medical procedures of thetime. However they were also used in religiousworship, particularly for anointing at baptismand during the last rites. (Rev. Dr. MichaelBrydon, pers. comm.).

Another point of comparison is provided bythe Chichester Cathedral Treasury (permanentexhibition, 2008) which has an impressiveexhibition of historic church plate fromSussex and the surrounding area dating fromthe 12th century. Some of the 16th-centuryplate currently on display is made from woodand silver, with various older pieces chiefly

of pewter. One piece in particular, a smallpaten made of bronze and dated c. 1275 wasexcavated from a small 'lay' church in Chiches-ter. The oldest bronze chalice in the collectionis dated c. 1375 and was again excavated fromSussex, but is neither stamped with any 'IHS'symbols nor any other religious inscription.Again, it is very simply decorated and quitesmall. This therefore may suggest that smaller,poorer churches and lay chapels in particular,may have employed ordinary domestic warevery similar to that found on the Mary Rose, forreligious use.

Another Mary Rose artefact with possiblemultiple uses is the 'bronze brazier' (Fig. 4), anitem which can also be found in churches andother religious collections (Museum of London,Religion Exhibition 1400-1800, July 2006) as a 'purifier'. The Mary Rose Museum currentlyinterprets this object as a warming dish, used toheat and sterilise needles, or to heat infusions.However, the Royal College of Surgeons (2007)suggests that this process would not have beenhot enough to sterilise a needle to preventinfection, and that the medical knowledge ofthe day was not sufficient to have understoodthis process fully in any case. Purifiers, however,were used in the early Modern period forridding the air of impurities, as it was believedthat 'foul' air carried disease. Similarly in the16th century, as Duffy (1992, 109-10) pointsout, in the presence of God the air would havebeen 'cleansed' with herbs to purify the sur-roundings for worship. The evidence for the useof purifiers in churches and monastic houses inthis context can clearly be seen in wood cutsand paintings of the period. Indeed Sir Christo-pher Trychay records in the Morebath accounts(Duffy 2003, 69) that incense and purifierswere paid for and used in the parish church incommon with all Catholic forms of worship tothis day. The preferred method was to swing a brass purifier on a chain containing hot coalsand frankincense around the church or chapelto cleanse the air before the congregationsettled for Mass. Hibbert (1987, 186-93) alsointimates that lay clerics employed in domesticchapels did this by leaving small dishes of frank-incense to smoulder at the altar.

FLOWER BOND: RELIGIOUS PRACTICES ON BOARD THE MARY ROSE: SOME OBSERVATIONS 1 4 1

Both the Museum of London and the Victoriaand Albert Museum (as previously discussed)have impressive collections of church furnitureand objects used for worship. Among them area number of purifiers made mainly from brass.They tend to be round in shape, with the bowlraised slightly on a foot, with notches, usually ofa religious kind (small and large crosses), cutinto the side rim like fretwork for the incenseto escape. Some are spherical with lids thathang by a chain from a high point, or can beheld by the priest. The Victoria and AlbertMuseum in particular (Temporary Exhibition;At Home in Renaissance Italy, July 2006) had onepiece similar to that of the barber surgeon'sbrazier from the Mary Rose, both in size andstyle, made of brass and labelled a 'warmer'.It dates from c. 1450 and was reputed to havebeen employed in the kitchen of a gentlehousehold to infuse herbs for medicine, andwas used with hot coals and incense. Althoughfound in the kitchen, this warmer obviously hada variety of uses, demonstrated by the residuesof fuel, incense, medicine and foodstuffs that itcontained (Ajmar-Wollheim and Dennis, 2006,334-5). This is thought-provoking in regard tothe brazier from the Mary Rose collection.

In October 2007, the National Museum ofPrague (Jewish Silver Exhibition) displayed similarbowls that also bear comparison with the MaryRose's artefacts. They are collectively referredto as 'Etrog' bowls and although consideredto be a Jewish custom, are used to hold sacredfood for worship. They are made of silver andbrass and heavily decorated. But again, manywere simpler for use in domestic contexts. Manyof the bowls were excavated from the Catholic'old quarter' of Prague, with one very simplepiece being found in the foundations of theBethlehem Chapel dating from c. 1600. Someof the bowls had feet attached to their basesand others were either oval or round in shape,with fine worked handles attached to the side.Many handles were beaten flat, and decoratedlike the Mary Rose's 'bleeding bowl' (above).In Jewish celebrations within the home, suchbowls are primarily reserved for sacred wafersor bread which is blessed before the meal andare used as a reminder of the Passover. This is

interesting considering the uses that may havebeen intended for the little bleeding bowl.

Similarly, the Catholic Church of the Immac-ulate Conception situated in the centre ofToreviejka, in Spain (visited December, 2007)has similar 'Etrog' bowls made from silverplaced on the high altar alongside the chaliceused for the mass. Some of these bowls hadflatter handles with the initials of the churchstamped onto one side of the handle, exactlylike the Mary Rose's example. Bowls of thisnature can also still be found in parts of Britain,especially in the Scottish highlands made fromwood and referred to as a 'porringers'. Theywere originally used in Gaelic clans as a foodcontainer instead of a plate (Wood 2007) andin pagan cultures they were often used forofferings of sacred food in worship.

At first glance, comparisons between mid-16th-century Catholicism and Jewish and pagantraditions may seem like a huge leap of faith.However it must be remembered that manyrituals and customs in the Catholic Church,including its most ancient rites, derive fromthese traditions. As Taylor (2003, 27) remindsus, the 'stoup' in Catholic churches whereparishioners cross themselves with holy wateron entering the building derives from theJewish custom of ritual washing of the hands,face, and sometimes the feet. This is a symbolicact of 'spiritual cleansing' before entering thehouse of God. In the same fashion, medievalchantries, introduced into England during the13th century, were also derived from variouselements of doctrinal theology where institu-tions come to 'intercede' for the departed souland ease their progression through Purgatory.Chantries were still being founded in churchesand cathedrals until the late 1540s, long afterthe Mar)' Rose had sunk, Chichester Cathedralbeing the prime example (Cindy Wood, pers. comm.). Thus doctrinal theology and ritual arefluid rather than static; they change with timeand according to the needs of the society inquestion.

The purpose of the above comparisons,drawn from museums across Europe, is simplyto suggest that many items stored in the barbersurgeon's cabin may have had non-medical uses,


including consecration for religious purposes.Thus far, claims have been made simply aboutpossible multiple uses of items found in thecabin. But what if the barber surgeon himselfwas licensed to fulfil multiple roles?

WHO MIGHT HAVE SERVED AS THECHAPLAIN ON BOARD THE MARY ROSE?

The barber surgeon's quarters containednumerous artefacts keptboth inside his medicinechest and loosely within the cabin itself (Allenand Gardiner 2005, 190-201). It containedobvious medical paraphernalia such as syringes,a pewter pesde and mortar, scalpels and pots ofherbal medicine. However as suggested above,other artefacts do not seem to fit the medicalcriteria, nor the domestic category they wereplaced in. If the objects discussed so far were infact of a religious nature, what were they doingin the barber surgeon's cabin on board a manof war? Perhaps we need to delve deeper intothe range of roles that might be performed bysuch a figure.

Until 1588 all vessels carried a licensedbarber surgeon to administer first aid, tendto the sick and the dying and - as the namesuggests - carry out barber's tasks on the menon board (Royal College of Surgeons 2007).The office was licensed through the Church,and each member had to hold a licence topractice their craft. The role was derived frommonastic traditions dating from the 12thcentury, since monks were forbidden to drawblood. Thus, monastic houses employed laymen to undertake the task of barber, shavingand cutting the hair of the monks. The officeevolved into a medical position, allowingbarbers to administer treatment to the monks,particularly when bleeding patients becamea common medical procedure (14th-centurymedical thought advocated relieving the bodyof 'bad' blood and evil spirits: Royal College ofSurgeons 2007).

Barber surgeons were very much respected,especially by Henry VIII who demonstrated hisfavour by founding the 'Guild of the BarberSurgeons' which had became two separate guilds

by the late 1540s. Barber surgeons by this timewere just one branch of the medical profession;at the top were the physicians and surgeonswho were university graduates with up to 14years training, then came the barber surgeonswho had completed a nine-year apprenticeshipwith a master surgeon. Finally, the apothecar-ies were the licensed 'chemists' of the time.Henry VIII is recorded as recommending mento particular posts and issuing licences fromthe crown in such cases (Lambeth SurgeonsRegister 1500-1800, 2007). Indeed he hadpaintings commissioned of the Surgeons Guildto celebrate their achievements, including oneexecuted by Holbein (a copy hangs in the MaryRose Museum).

Interestingly in July 1547, Bishop StephenGardiner placed a new incumbent to the parishof Portchester in Hampshire, who appears onthe Lambeth Surgeons list of the same yearunder the patronage of the King (Ecclesiasti-cal Database, www.theclergydatabase.org.ukand Lambeth Surgeons Register 1500-1800).Although this is two years after the sinking ofthe Mary Rose, the appointment may suggestthat Henry had personally appointed the barbersurgeon to the vessel for the campaign of 1545.Furthermore in 1513 (Naval Accounts 1513,Mary Rose Trust 2007), there had been 32 NavalSurgeons, one of whom, Robert Sympson, withhis assistant Henry Yonge, had served on boardthe Mary Rose and had indeed been appointedby Henry VIII in that year. It seems highlyunlikely that these men served for long periodsof time, as their appointments would have beenfor the duration of the campaign and the MaryRose was only ever at sea during her 35 yearsservice for a few months at a time.

Unfortunately, there are no records detailingwho the barber surgeon was in 1545. Howeversome initials appear on items found in his cabin.They appear to be a 'W and 'E', although the'E' could be another letter styled in a specificway such as an 'A'. They are engraved into thehandles of the 'bleeding bowl' (like the Jewish'Etrog' bowls) and the lid of a pewter tankardtogether with some of the medical toolsfound. However, the barber surgeon's namewas not entered in any surviving records and


no obituary was given in the months after thesinking that would identify him, as had beenthe case with Sir George Carew, the Mary Rose'sVice Admiral (Banting 2007, Ch. 1). The MaryRose Museum does have a silk cap found neara skeleton in the barber surgeon's cabin whichresembles those in the Holbein painting, andwhich suggests strongly that the barber surgeonwas on board when the ship sank.

It is noteworthy that, according to entries inthe Ecclesiastical Database (2007), two incum-bents placed at Portchester in Hampshireduring the 1540s, both before and after thesinking of the Mary Rose, had initials of a 'W oran 'E' respectively, although sadly not indicatingeither a first name or surname using both thoseletters. This warrants further investigation, butit can be suggested that the barber surgeon wasthe person responsible for officiating religiousservices on board the Mary Rose, and that theartefacts found in his cabin can substantiate theargument. The bleeding bowl and the braziermay have had several uses including religiousones, and the bottles of oils found could havebeen used not only for care of the sick, but alsofor blessing the dead. This would obviously havebeen a high priority in warfare, such as in thecase of July 1545 while engaging the French, inorder to bury the dead with respect and remainin keeping with the Catholic doctrinal theologyat the time.

THE EVIDENCE OF NAVAL RECORDS ANDSHIPS' LOGS

Numerous naval records and ships' logs areheld at the National Maritime Museum atGreenwich. The museum holds records notonly for the English fleet but also material onthe French and Spanish navies of the earlymodern period onwards. Theses documentaryrecords complement what we may deduce fromarchaeological evidence. Log books usuallyprovide details of the ship and its crew, names,rank, pay, discipline and daily duties. Mostimportant for this article, the logs includedetails that suggest that religious worship wasvalued highly on board ship. From a sample of

50 logs, nearly all itemised religious observanceas ranked fifth of the 100 point rules of shipboard life (Lavery 1998).

Naval records from 1631-1815 documentedthat worship was to take place on a Sunday at10am, after breaking the fast at 8am and inspec-tion (Lavery 1998). The crew would be calledto worship by the ship's bell and if they lackeda commissioned chaplain onboard, it would beconducted by the schoolmaster or the midship-man. They also stated that if these men were of,'insufficient character then the captain wouldpreside'. The purser on board HMS Gibraltarin 1731 (Ships Log, Maritime Museum, 2007)documented that; 'Swearing, Blaspheming andtaking God's name in vain' would require theirons, and a forfeit of two days pay. Each divisionon board ship was required by the vessel's par-ticular rules of discipline, to administer prayersand devotions on the Sabbath whilst at sea.

The majority of the records list the times ofthe service, the appropriate dress code of thecrew, their cleanliness, and the prayers and thehymns to be used. They also noted the timeswhen the ship's bell would be tolled to callthe men to service and to change the watch.It is noteworthy here that the Mary Rose had a single bell (Allen and Gardiner 2005, 285) verysimilar to those described in the logs, whichwas placed at the centre of the main deck thusaiding its acoustics. Indeed these accounts wereused in the creation of the Armada scenes forthe much acclaimed Elizabeth: The Golden Age (Kapur 2007), in which the Spanish are seenreceiving mass before engaging in batde, havingbeen called to prayer by the ships bell situatedon the main deck.

Surgeons' accounts for the ships' logs areitemised in the same fashion, with the rank ofthe officer and in most cases, the name of thechaplain who appeared to be under his juris-diction. They also list the patients, their illness,and the outcome of their treatment. Moreimportandy they list the details of the chaplainor first lieutenant who prepared the dead,together with details of who issued the lastrights before the surgeon closed the hammockfor burial at sea (The dead were sewn intotheir personal sleeping hammocks to serve as a


shroud; however, no evidence has been foundon the Mary Rose of hammocks or any othersleeping equipment, The Royal Navy, Port-smouth Dockyard, 2007) It is also striking toobserve the degree of co-operation between thesurgeon and the other officers who performedthese duties in the absence of a ship's chaplain,albeit under strict codes of conduct.

The earlier Spanish naval records dating from1588 detail the medical staff and the priests onboard ship along with their daily and expectedduties (DRO SP12/215/67). The recordsimply that the responsibilities of the two menwere entwined; if the priest was absent thenthe medical officer would assume his duties,and vice versa. Each appeared to be trainedto the same level and had junior ranks undertheir guidance. Juan Martinez, the chaplain ofthe San Pedro Mayor, earned 10 escudos permonth and was listed as one of seven clergyin April 1588 (DRO SP12/215/67/1); he wasemployed at the Armada Hospital and had 5 men training under him. It was thus possiblefor the duties of a chaplain to be undertaken bya variety of people, including barber surgeons.Clearly also, the provision for worship on boardship was taken seriously enough for a range ofpeople to act as chaplain should that becomenecessary.

CONCLUSION

This paper has aimed to provoke thought ratherthan to supply answers. It has set out to investi-gate what historians and archaeologists mightdeduce about religious artefacts excavated fromthe Mary Rose, a process which has exposedmany problems at various levels. Archaeolo-gists, historians and museum curators alike,faced as they are by a large number of survivingartefacts, are attempting to place pieces in a very large jigsaw. Few of the artefacts are self-explanatory, and many pose real problems ofinterpretation - both on recovery and whenlater presented as objects in exhibitions. In par-ticular, few people have stopped to think muchabout possible religious artefacts on what wasessentially a naval man of war. This problem

may have at its root our increasingly secular -but also multi-faith - society. This said, thereare few documentary sources surviving forthe Mary Rose, and the bulk of the artefactsrecovered relate to shipping and warfare. Inattempting to ask wider questions about society,we are thus forced to extrapolate from limitedmaterial, make comparisons with artefacts heldin other museums, and ponder carefully whatthe work of historians working on 16th-centuryreligion might imply for worship on board ship.One should also bear in mind that evidence ofCatholicism is by its very nature more visiblein the archaeological record than that of Prot-estantism. That is, pamphlets and books arefar less likely to survive than are rosaries and'talismans' (Dr Simon Roffey, pers. comm.). Inshort, museum curators cannot be blamed forfinding their task difficult as they wade throughtens of thousands of surviving artefacts.

Ironically, the finds on board the Mary Roseprobably add to the confusion of even thosevisitors who have a smattering of knowledge ofthis period, and who associate Henry VIII withthe Protestant Reformation. But the Churchof England did not fully materialise until the1560s, and historians now agree that the kinghimself was never anything but a Catholic. Atthe end of his reign in 1547, two years after theMay Rose was lost, religious observance was stillswinging back and forth. Indeed, Henry's owninventory, like that of his queens and daughter,reveal that they owned many devotional imagesand jewels (Foister 2003, 335). Thus this paperhas contributed to current academic foci, par-ticularly the continuance of Catholic customsand practices during the mid-16th century, a topic addressed in detail for parishes on landby Duffy and others. It has shown that the MaryRose can be considered as a classic 'floatingparish', its crew still observing Catholic piety -exactly what scholars would now expect of a ship that sank in 1545.

One line of research that has proved fruitfulis the analysis of the barber surgeon's workand the nature of his equipment, and it hasbeen argued here that we should consider hiswork in both a medical and a spiritual light.There is documentary evidence that the barber


surgeon - in the absence of a chaplain - mayhave officiated at religious ceremonies in andaround 1588 and beyond. This suggests thatthe practice may have originated earlier, par-ticularly as barbers were licensed to serve inmonastic foundations since the 12th century.

Susan Foister has warned that 'it is easy tounderestimate today the extent of the useof... devotional material, and its significancein ... early 16th-century English life' (Foister2003, 336). Accordingly, what this paper hashopefully achieved is to provoke thought aboutwhat the Mary Rose reveals about religiouspractices at sea in the mid 16th century, andto demonstrate that, despite difficulties ofinterpretation, this is a legitimate theme formuseum curators to investigate. Those whomanned the ship have been shown to havebeen observing at least personal forms ofCatholic piety. This should be of no surprise,given the survival of large numbers of personalartefacts associated with Catholic worship. Yetmore research is required before a completeaccount of religious practices on board this,or other ships of this period, may be offered.More also needs to be done before museumcurators can feel that they have adequatelypresented their findings on this matter to thepublic. This paper itself represents one way ofassisting those responsible for future exhibi-tions at the new Mary Rose Museum, plannedfor 2011, by raising a number of matters for

consideration. Future exhibitions may nowraise more questions than ever as we anticipatediscussion of the role of the barber surgeon,together with the assembly of artefacts undera 'religious' banner, that have hitherto beenconsigned to obscurity.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This article began as a dissertation for a BAHonours degree in History at the University ofChichester; a copy is available at the UniversityLibrary. I am grateful to Dr Amanda Richard-son, one of my tutors, for suggesting that thefindings of the research should be published.I also thank Dr Andrew Foster for his supervi-sion of my original project, and his enthusiasmfor seeing the results published, and ProfessorKeith Jenkins for his general guidance andsupport. I am grateful to Andrew Elkerton,Peter Crossman and Simon Ware at the MaryRose Trust for allowing me close access toartefacts recovered from the ship. I must alsoextend my thanks to Cindy Wood of the Uni-versity of Winchester for her information onmedieval chantries, and the staff of the Victoriaand Albert Museum, The Museum of London,The National Maritime Museum Library, andthe archivists at the record offices in London,Exeter, Portsmouth and Chichester, not tomention many helpful librarians.

REFERENCES

Primary Sources

Mary Rose Artefacts Paternosters 81A1414 and 80A0995Bone Angels 81A2581Bronze bleeding bowl 80A1625Bronze Brazier 80A1626Maltese cross 81A1347Pewter jug with stamped initials 81A0651Glass bottle 80A1565Pair of carved tresde table ends 81A1708/1-3

Manuscript and Printed Primary Sources Devon Record Office (DRO), Exeter, Dartmouth

Records. DRO SP12/215/67.1 August-September 1588.

Glynne, S 1994 Sir Stephen Glynne's Church Notes for Somerset (Somerset Record Society 82),Stroud

Lambeth Surgeons Register 1500-1800, 2007 LambethHospital, London.

Mary Rose Trust, Naval Accounts (1513), Mar)' RoseMuseum, Portsmouth.

146 HAMPSH[RE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Secondary Sources

Ajmar-Wollheim, M & Dennis, F 2006 At Home in Ren-aissance Italy, London.

Allen, M & Gardiner, J 2005 Before the Mast: Life and Death On Board the Mary Rose, Portsmouth.

Banting, D R 2007 An Introduction to the Life and Times of George Carew, Vice Admiral of the Mary Rose, West Sussex.

Catholic Truth Society, 1992 The Rosary Book, Massachusetts.

Duffy, E 1992 The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England 1400-1580, London.

Duffy, E 2003 The Voices of Morebalh: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village, London.

Foister, S F 2003 Private devotion, in Marks, R & Wil-liamson, P (eds), Gothic: Art for England 1400-1547, London, 334-47.

Flower-Bond, C 2008 What can the Mary Rose tellus about the nature of religious observ-ance in 1545?, unpubl. B.A. dissertation,University of Chichester.

Hibbert, C 1987 The English: A Social History 1066-1945, London.

Kapur, S (dir.) 2007 Elizabeth: The Golden Age, WorkingTide Films.

Lavery, B (ed.) 1998 Shipboard Life and Organisation 1731-1815 (Navy Records Society 138),London.

Linton, M 2000 Toleration in Enlightenment Europe, Cambridge.

Marshall, P 1997 The Impact of the English Reformation 1500-1640, London.

Taylor, R 2003 How to Read a Church, London.Wollheim, A M & Dennis, F 2006 At Home In Renais-

sance Italy, London.Wood, R 2007 The Wooden Bowl, London.

WebsitesEcclesiastical Data Base, http://www.theclergydata-

base.org.uk/The Royal College of Surgeons, Harley Street, London,

England (Barber Surgeons Society)http://www.rcseng.ac.uk/

Author. Catherine Flower Bond, Forestside, West Sussex, P 0 9 [email protected].

© Hampshi re Field Club and Archaeological Society

religious practices on board the mary rose: some observations€¦ · ered in a personal sea chest,...

Documents