THE MARY ROSE.

[Peter Hudson]

The ship went through several changes in her armament throughout her career, most significantly accompanying her "rebuilding" in 1536 (see below), when the number of anti-personnel guns was reduced and a second tier of carriage-mounted long guns fitted. There are three inventories that list her guns, dating to 1514, 1540 and 1546.[31] Together with records from the armoury at the Tower of London, these show how the configuration of guns changed as gun-making technology evolved and new classifications were invented. In 1514, the armament consisted mostly of anti-personnel guns like the larger breech-loading iron murderers and the small serpentines, demi-slings and stone guns.[32]

Only a handful of guns in the first inventory were powerful enough to hole enemy ships, and most would have been supported by the ship's structure rather than resting on carriages. The inventories of both the Mary Rose and the Tower had changed radically by 1540. There were now the new cast bronze cannons, demi-cannons, culverins and sakers and the wrought iron port pieces (a name that indicated they fired through ports), all of which required carriages, had longer range and were capable of doing serious damage to other ships. The analysis of the 1514 inventory combined with hints of structural changes in the ship both indicate that the gunports on the main deck were indeed a later addition.[32]


Various types of ammunition could be used for different purposes: plain spherical shot of stone or iron smashed hulls, spiked bar shot and shot linked with chains would tear sails or damage rigging, and canister shot packed with sharp flints produced a devastating shotgun effect.[34] Trials made with replicas of culverins and port pieces showed that they could penetrate wood the same thickness of the Mary Rose's hull planking, indicating a stand-off range of at least 90 m (300 ft). The port pieces proved particularly efficient at smashing large holes in wood when firing stone shot and were a devastating anti-personnel weapon when loaded with flakes or pebbles

[Peter Hudson]

Hand-held weapons
Five dagger handles with bulbous guards with the badly corroded remains of a few steel blades against a white background
Some of the bollock daggers found on board the Mary Rose; for most of the daggers, only the handles have remained while the blades have either rusted away or have been preserved only as concretions.
To defend against being boarded, Mary Rose carried large stocks of melee weapons, including pikes and bills; 150 of each kind were stocked on the ship according to the Anthony Roll, a figure confirmed roughly by the excavations. Swords and daggers were personal possessions and not listed in the inventories, but the remains of both have been found in great quantities, including the earliest dated example of a British basket-hilted sword.[36]

A total of 250 longbows were carried on board, and 172 of these have so far been found, as well as almost 4,000 arrows, bracers (arm guards) and other archery-related equipment.[37] Longbow archery in Tudor England was mandatory for all able adult men, and despite the introduction of field artillery and handguns, they were used alongside new missile weapons in great quantities. On the Mary Rose, the longbows could only have been drawn and shot properly from behind protective panels in the open waist or from the top of the castles as the lower decks lacked sufficient headroom. There were several types of bows of various size and range. Lighter bows would have been used as "sniper" bows, while the heavier design could possibly have been used to shoot fire arrows.[38]

The inventories of both 1514 and 1546[31] also list several hundred heavy darts and lime pots that were designed to be thrown onto the deck of enemy ships from the fighting tops, although no physical evidence of either of these weapon types has been identified. Of the 50 handguns listed in the Anthony Roll, the complete stocks of five matchlock muskets and fragments of another eleven have been found. They had been manufactured mainly in Italy, with some originating from Germany. Found in storage were several gunshields, a rare type of firearm consisting of a wooden shield with a small gun fixed in the middle.[39

[urbanspaceman]

Hey Peter, I know I am left-field here but I wondered just where were those canons made?

[Peter Hudson]

Good question Keith... I have found a number of publications on the subject however I am unable to track down a history of those Cannon makers ...These must have been Royal Factories and under the staregic control of the Rulers Office...especially in the early days... The tight grip on such factories was done via the chief engineers who were carefully selected...


The Surveyor-General of the Ordnance was a subordinate of the Master-General of the Ordnance and a member of the Board of Ordnance, a British government body, from its constitution in 1597. Appointments to the post were made by the crown under Letters Patent. His duties were to examine the ordnance received to see that it was of good quality. He also came to be responsible for the mapping of fortifications and eventually of all Great Britain, through the Ordnance Survey, and it is this role that is generally associated with surveyor-generalship.

[Peter Hudson]

Some light may be seen at https://www.arc.id.au/Cannon.html on the subject

[Peter Hudson]

John Browne (King's Gunfounder)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Browne
Died 1651
Nationality English
Occupation Gunfounder
Known for Gunfounder to Charles I
Spouse Martha
John Browne was an English merchant, the first holder of the post of King's Gunfounder, which was created in 1615. He was heavily involved in the Wealden iron industry, having control of six furnaces in Surrey and Sussex, two in the Forest of Dean as well as his own furnace between Brenchley and Horsmonden.[1]

Biography
During the reign of Charles I, he sold a great number of guns to the former United Provinces, the King being a partner in this traffic.

Browne also held a patent which gave him a monopoly on the casting of pots, pans and firebacks.[1]

John Browne developed a type of cannon known as "The Drake" in the 1620s. This cannon was much lighter than previous cannons firing a similar weight of shot, thus enabling ships to be more heavily armed. One such cannon made by Browne was recovered from the wreck of HMS Swan, a 200 long tons (200 t) Cromwellian warship lost in a storm off the Isle of Mull in 1653 whilst attacking Duart Castle. This cannon weighed 3cwt, 2qtrs, 23 lbs (415 pounds (188 kg)) and had a 3½" (89mm) muzzle. It fired shot weighing 4 pounds (1.81 kg). HMS Swan was the last ship built for Charles I; its guns were all cast in iron. A larger ship, HMS Sovereign of the Seas had 92 Drakes, cast in bronze, as well as 10 non-Drakes, also cast in bronze.[2][3][4]

[M ELEY]

Wow! This is some great material on the Rose! Thank you for posting this indepth material, Peter! I have an archeaological book on the dive/salvage of this historic ship. One of the items that (amazingly) came out intact was a slat pitcher/tankard held together with cordage, common in that era. I managed to get a similar artifact for my own maritime collection of a wood 'noggin' tankard, ca. 1600's. Appreciate you posting this!

[Peter Hudson]

ThankYou for your supporting words on the subject ... I noted how there was very little work done on Forum about Navy weapons and thought how The Mary Rose seemed to put that right. Other discoveries such as the English Basket Hilt and the hoard of English Longbows and Arrows were connected to current discussions on Forum...The collection of Canons and the ability of this ship to fire broadside (actually I find that slightly odd as would thatnot be a potential cause of her sinking ? There some plausible reasons for her demise including lower dack gun doors being not closed but actually no one has yet put a finger on the exact cause of her suddenly going down...

Regards, Peter Hudson