5 surprising Tudor facts

History Extra

The family of Henry VIII, c1572. (Photo by Universal History Archive/Getty Images)

1)  The Tudors wore spectacles

In 1541, the grandmother of Henry VIII’s fifth wife, Katherine Howard, under suspicion for her knowledge of the queen’s pre-marital sexual affairs, broke into coffers belonging to two of the men involved and sent for her spectacles to read the letters that she found. Since she was doing this by candlelight in the middle of the night, it’s not surprising she needed a little help to read – and then burn – these incriminating documents.
Spectacles at this time were usually armless, designed to sit on the bridge of the nose or to be handheld. Although they were useful for reading, they wouldn’t have been particularly helpful for people who needed to wear them all the time. Poor eyesight was common in Tudor England and there was little that could be done about it. The many remedies for eye conditions that can be found in early modern medical recipe books show that people certainly tried to cure themselves – but the vast array of remedies suggests none of them were very effective!

2)  The official penalty for brawling within the royal court was the loss of a hand

With a court full of young and rowdy men, Henry VIII felt that a deterrent was necessary to control his courtiers, and he chose to make the punishment fit the crime. In 1541 Sir Edmund Knyvett [the eldest son of distinguished courtier and sea captain Sir Thomas Knyvet] had a fight on the tennis court with one of the Earl of Surrey’s servants, Thomas Clere, and landed a punch on Clere’s nose. Knyvett was arraigned for this later in the year and sentenced to lose his hand.
Apparently the royal surgeon would be the one to sever the hand; the king’s mastercook supplied the knife; and the sergeant farrier [the person in charge of providing horses with shoes] the hot iron to sear the wound, while the sergeant of the cellar [the person in charge of the court’s alcohol] supplied alcohol (for the spectators, not the victim).
Knyvett is said to have pleaded that his left hand be cut off, so that he could continue to serve the king with his right. Happily for Knyvett, in the end he was pardoned, but the king put out a proclamation then and there that in future, anyone found brawling within the precincts of the court would definitely lose a hand.

3)  Elizabeth I could be violent

She may not have borne arms or led an army, but Elizabeth I could be quite violent in a domestic setting. When in a rage, she swore like a trooper and could apparently be heard several rooms away.
Elizabeth was not above abusing her ladies-in-waiting; in 1576, when she discovered that Mary Shelton had secretly married courtier Sir John Scudamore two years previously, she flew into a rage and rained blows on the unfortunate Mary, and according to some sources may have broken her finger.
Elizabeth I wasn’t above throwing things either; there is a story that she once threw a slipper at her spymaster, Sir Francis Walsingham. Elizabeth also had no toleration for lack of respect: one day in 1598, Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, turned his back on the queen during a heated argument. For this unthinkable breach of court etiquette, Elizabeth promptly boxed his ears, at which point Essex placed his hand on his sword hilt [handle]. Shocked courtiers scrambled to put themselves between him and the queen, and Essex stormed out of the room.

4) Tudor aristocrats gave each another some interesting presents

Gift-giving was a key element of the patronage system; if you wanted something done, you gave the relevant person a gift, since this would in theory force them to reciprocate by doing whatever it was that you wanted. Gifts could be very personal, such as jewellery worn by the giver, or clothing.

Food items could also be given as gifts; for example, noblewoman Lady Honor Lisle prided herself on her homemade quince marmalade [quince is a fruit similar in appearance to a pear]. Some food items were rather more exotic, and letters testify to attempts to transport seal and porpoise before they went bad.

Sometimes even live animals were given as gifts. Lady Lisle sought advice on a gift for Anne Boleyn in the 1530s and was told that the queen hated monkeys, but liked spaniels. Plus, Princess Mary (later Mary I) was given a parrot by the Countess of Derby in 1538.

New Year’s Day, rather than Christmas, was the biggest gift-giving day for the Tudors, and nobles competed to give the king or queen the best present. Such gifts usually involved vast quantities of gold and jewels, but were sometimes more inventive: the Duke of Norfolk gave Henry VIII a chess set in 1532, and in 1557 Mary I and her husband, Philip II of Spain, were given “a Map of England, stayned upon cloth of silver in a frame of wood”. It is also said that Elizabeth I’s courtiers indulged her love of clothes with gifts of gowns and fabric.

5)  All Tudor monarchs, and many aristocrats, adopted or inherited mottos that would be used alongside their personal symbol or ‘badge’ on their servants’ livery [uniform]

These mottos could change to reflect important events or occasions, such as a marriage, and temporary mottos were worn during tournaments.
Some of these mottos are well known: Henry VIII’s ‘Coeur Loyale’ (Loyal Heart) in 1511 after the birth of Prince Henry; ‘Declare, I Dare Not’ in 1526, which is thought to relate to Anne Boleyn; and the royal motto still used by our queen today, ‘Dieu et mon droit’ (God and my right)'. Some mottos are less well known – for example, Mary I’s was ‘Truth, the daughter of time’.

Some Tudor mottos have a peculiarly modern feel. Philip II’s motto when king of Spain was ‘The world is not enough’ – apt for a man who controlled Spain, the Netherlands, parts of Italy, and swathes of Germany! Anne Boleyn used the motto ‘Ainsi sera, groigne qui groigne’, during the Christmas period in 1530, which in modern idiom is more or less ‘Haters gonna hate’ – a clear reference to her intention to marry Henry VIII.

Dr Nicola Clark is an early modern historian specialising in gender and court history at Royal Holloway, University of London, and the University of Chichester. Her book, Gender, Family and Politics: The Howard Women, 1485–1558 is forthcoming with Oxford University Press.

History Trivia - Cnut, king of Denmark, claims the throne of all England

November 30 

1016 Cnut, king of Denmark, claimed the throne of all England after Edmund 'Ironside', king of England, died.

1630 16,000 inhabitants of Venice died this month of plague.

1648 English army captured King Charles I.
 

French Egyptologist Asserts that the Younger Lady is Really the Mummy of Nefertiti

Ancient Origins

French Egyptologist Marc Gabolde, specialist in the Eighteenth Dynasty and the Amarna period, argues that the mummy known as the "Younger Lady" discovered almost a century ago, is actually the famous and much sought after Queen Nefertiti.
As Ancient Origins reported on Monday, the British researcher Nicholas Reeves is currently located in Luxor, Egypt. Reeves says that inside the tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamun, discovered by Howard Carter 93 years ago, there is access to a secret chamber which contains the long sought after tomb of the beautiful Nefertiti. The renowned Egyptologist, member of the University of Arizona, says he arrived at this conclusion after observing high resolution images of the tomb of the famous pharaoh, where he saw some fine cracks that correspond to the sealed entrance to what he believes is a hidden chamber -  in which the mortal remains of the wife of the revolutionary pharaoh Akhenaten may rest.
However, for Marc Gabolde, French Egyptologist specialist in the Eighteenth Dynasty and the Egyptian Armana period, the mummy of Nefertiti was discovered almost a century ago in the Valley of the Kings by fellow Frenchman Victor Loret – a mummy currently found in the Egyptian Museum and which is known as the Younger Lady or KV35YL mummy.

Limestone relief that was probably part of a family worship altar.  Akhenaten holding up his firstborn Meritaten and, in front of both, Nefertiti holds Meketaton, her second daughter (who died prematurely), in her lap. On her left shoulder is Anjesenpaaton her third daughter, who later would marry Tutankhamen. Berlin Museum. (CC BY SA 3.0)

Royal Tombs Smaller than Usual

In statements to the Spanish newspaper ABC, Gabolde claims that the existence of two chambers in the tomb of Tutankhamen is nothing out of the ordinary, in view of  other royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings,  such as those of Amenhotep II (KV 35), Thutmose IV (KV 43), Amenhotep III (WV 22), and even that of Horemheb (KV 57). He also believes that the burial chamber of Tutankhamun being noticeably smaller simply indicates that the chamber was made “reasonable” to the size necessary for Tutankhamun. He continues that it is no wonder, given the economy of the time, that four secondary chambers were reduced to two. “There is absolutely nothing abnormal,” says the scholar and member of the University of Montpellier.

Images of the plan of the KV57 tomb belonging to Horemheb, made ​​from a three-dimensional model. (CC BY SA 3.0)

The researcher also explained that there are other tombs of Egyptian pharaohs like Ay, successor of Tutankhamun, in which all auxiliary chambers are absent, and also recalls how when Ramses I died, workers had barely begun the second ramp to his tomb. In fact his son Seti I:

“Simply extended the corridor to be a burial chamber provided with two annexes and a half and not the four required. If there was not much time, digging all adjoining areas did not seem to be a priority. Considering all this, the presence of additional chambers in the tomb of Tutankhamun is less "obvious" than Reeves suggests that it is,” Gabolde said.

• The Mysterious Disappearance of Nefertiti, Ruler of the Nile
• The tragedy of Queen Ankhesenamun, sister and wife of Tutankhamun
• The Mystery of Egyptian Tomb KV55 in the Valley of the Kings
• The Lost Tomb of Imhotep?

Furthermore, the signs discovered by Reeves do not necessarily, according to Gabolde, need to be traces of sealed doors, instead they:

“Could be marks left by two teams of carvers or have been part of a project to create additional chambers, abandoned in a hurry, with slits hastily recapped. I sincerely hope that Reeves is partially right and does find a sealed room with the remains of a pharaoh queen behind the paintings because it may clarify the identity of the pharaoh’s queen. However, this is more likely to be Meritaten than Nefertiti.” According to the Egyptologist in his statements published in ABC.

The Mummy of the Younger Lady

In September 2010,  National Geographic  announced the results of an investigation conducted by an interdisciplinary team led by the famous and controversial Egyptologist Zahi Hawass. With it, it was verified through DNA tests that the KV35 mummies were actually the grandmother and the mother of Tutankhamun.
Marc Gabolde believes that the mummy identified in these studies as Tutankhamun's mother - or the Younger Lady - is really the mummy of Queen Nefertiti. “Nefertiti was Akhenaten's cousin, both by paternal and maternal ancestry and is identical to the mummy KV35YL. She is the mother of Tutankhamun.”
According to the French Egyptologist’s hypothesis, strong inbreeding probably would have caused "genetic mixing to have been quite weak, which would explain the genetic heritage of Akhenaten and Nefertiti having the appearance of a brother and a sister."

Profile picture of the “Younger Lady” mummy who, according to genetic studies, corresponded to the mother of Tutankhamun. According to Marc Gabolde it is really the mummy of Nefertiti. (Public Domain)

Gabolde indicates in his latest book, focused on the figure of Tutankhamun, that Nefertiti would have died a few months before her husband “never having been pharaoh.” Not that she would have ruled Egypt between Akhenaten and Tutankhamun anyway, as it would have been Meritaten, the oldest of the six daughters born of the marriage between Nefertiti and Akhenaten, who would have done so.
“Bolstered by her prestigious heritage and the fact that she was, for some months, the “great royal wife” of her father - probably only honorary title after the death of Nefertiti, Meritaten reigned about two full years,” according to Gabolde. The tomb of the eldest daughter of Akhenaten has not yet been discovered.
These are hypotheses, studies, and absolutely exciting and interesting opinions, that perhaps within hours, may come collapsing down, if the British Nicholas Reeves is right and behind the walls of the tomb of Tutankhamun are the remains of Nefertiti.

Bust of Meritaten, daughter of Nefertiti and Akhenaten and Great Royal Wife of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Louvre, Paris. (CC BY SA 1.0)

Featured image: Front view of the mummy of the "Younger Lady". (Public Domain)
Author: Mariló TA
This article was first published in Spanish at https://www.ancient-origins.es and has been translated with permission.

History Trivia - Antioch struck by an earthquake

November 29

526 - Antioch in modern day Syria was struck by an Earthquake, about 250,000 died.

939 Edmund was crowned as king of England as his half-brother Aethelstan died. 

Getting under the skin of a medieval mystery

Ancient Origins

A simple PVC eraser has helped an international team of scientists led by bioarchaeologists at the University of York to resolve the mystery surrounding the tissue-thin parchment used by medieval scribes to produce the first pocket Bibles.
Thousands of the Bibles were made in the 13th century, principally in France but also in England, Italy and Spain. But the origin of the parchment -- often called 'uterine vellum' -- has been a source of longstanding controversy.
Use of the Latin term abortivum in many sources has led some scholars to suggest that the skin of fetal calves was used to produce the vellum. Others have discounted that theory, arguing that it would not have been possible to sustain livestock herds if so much vellum was produced from fetal skins. Older scholarship even argued that unexpected alternatives such as rabbit or squirrel may have been used, while some medieval sources suggest that hides must have been split by hand through use of a lost technology.
A multi-disciplinary team of researchers, led by Dr Sarah Fiddyment and Professor Matthew Collins of the BioArCh research facility in the Department of Archaeology at York, developed a simple and objective technique using standard conservation treatments to identify the animal origin of parchment.
The non-invasive method is a variant on ZooMS (ZooArchaeology by Mass Spectrometry) peptide mass fingerprinting but extracts protein from the parchment surface simply by using electrostatic charge generated by gentle rubbing of a PVC eraser on the membrane surface.

Protein are extracted from the parchment simply by rubbing a PVC eraser on the membrane surface. Credit: Matthew Collins

The research, which is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), involved scientists and scholars from France, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, the USA and the UK. They analysed 72 pocket Bibles originating in France, England and Italy, and 293 further parchment samples from the 13th century. The parchment samples ranged in thickness from 0.03 -- 0.28mm.
Dr Fiddyment said: "We found no evidence for the use of unexpected animals; however, we did identify the use of more than one mammal species in a single manuscript, consistent with the local availability of hides.

"Our results suggest that ultrafine vellum does not necessarily derive from the use of abortive or newborn animals with ultra-thin skin, but could equally reflect a production process that allowed the skins of maturing animals of several species to be rendered into vellum of equal quality and fineness."

Parchment or vellum was often made by stretching it on a wooden frame (public domain)

The research represents the first use of triboelectric extraction of protein from parchment. The method is non-invasive and requires no specialist equipment or storage. Samples can be collected without need to transport the artifacts -- researchers can sample when and where possible and analyse when required.
Bruce Holsinger, Professor of English and Medieval Studies at the University of Virginia and the initial humanities collaborator on the project, said: "The research team includes scholars and collaborators from over a dozen disciplines across the laboratory sciences, the humanities, the library and museum sciences--even a parchment maker. In addition to the discoveries we're making, what I find so exciting about this project is its potential to inspire new models for broad-based collaborative research across multiple paradigms. We think together, model together, write together."
Alexander Devine, of the Schoenberg Institute for Manuscript Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, said: "The bibles produced on a vast scale throughout the 13th century established the contents and appearance of the Christian Bible familiar to us today. Their importance and influence stem directly from their format as portable one-volume books, made possible by the innovative combination of strategies of miniaturization and compression achieved through the use of extremely thin parchment. The discoveries of this innovative research therefore enhance our understanding of how these bibles were produced enormously, and by extension, illuminate our knowledge of one of the most significant text technologies in the histories of the Bible and of Western Christianity."

• 13th century cat- and goat-hide shop excavated in England
• Ultraviolet light reveals hidden text in ancient book of Arthurian stories
• The Enigma of the Voynich Manuscript: History or Hoax?

Professor Collins added: "The level of access we have achieved highlights the importance of this technique. Without the eraser technique we could not have extracted proteins from so many parchment samples. Further, with no evidence of unexpected species, such as rabbit or squirrel, we believe that 'uterine vellum' was often an achievement of technological production using available resources."
Since finishing the work, parchment conservator Jií Vnouček, a co-author on the paper, has used this knowledge to recreate parchment similar to 'uterine vellum' from old skins. He said: "It is more a question of using the right parchment making technology than using uterine skin. Skins from younger animal are of course optimal for production of thin parchment but I can imagine that every skin was collected, nothing wasted."
Featured image: Manuscript of the ‘Book of Hours’ produced in Florence in the late 15th century. It is on uterine vellum. Credit: Rauner Special Collections Library.
By: Ancient-Origins

History Trivia - Julius II officially crowned pope

November 28 

1503 Julius II was officially crowned pope.  Born Giuliano Della Rovere, Julius was the nephew of Pope Sixtus IV, who built the Sistine Chapel. Although his relationship to Sixtus helped his early career, he was forced to flee Italy to avoid assassination attempts ordered by Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI), and stayed in exile for ten years before Borgia's death made it possible for him to return.

Researchers Claim Glastonbury Ancient Legends Made Up By Cash-Strapped Monks

Ancient Origins

The famous legends of King Arthur and his round table, among other ancient myths, were stories made up and peddled by enterprising monks at Glastonbury Abbey to make some cash, say researchers. What’s more, these legends muddied modern research into the site by “clouding the judgement” of past experts.
These are the claims being made recently by a team archaeologists from the University of Reading in UK after a four year study.

The ruins of Glastonbury Abbey in Somerset, England. (CC BY 2.0)

As reported by The Guardian the physical history of the site has been reexamined and the conclusions are:

“Those feet, immortalized in William Blake’s poem Jerusalem, never walked on the green and pleasant land of Glastonbury; the oldest church in England was not built there by Christ’s disciples; Joseph of Arimathea’s walking stick does not miraculously flower every Christmas after 2,000 years. And it turns out that the supposed link with King Arthur and his beautiful queen, Guinevere, is false too – invented by 12th-century monks faced with a financial crisis in the wake of a disastrous fire.”

Archaeologists claim the Glastonbury monks clouded the history of the site by deliberately designing renovations after a fire in 1184.  The redesign is said to have employed a purposeful archaic architectural style to generate a mythical feel, supporting popular legends and thereby raising more money from eager pilgrims.
In addition, “Arthur’s supposed grave has been revealed as a cemetery pit containing material dating from between the 11th and 15th centuries, offering no evidential links to the era of the legendary 5th and 6th century leader,” reports Culture24.

The Legendary King Arthur: "And when they came to the sword that the hand held, King Arthur took it up." (Public Domain)

Recent archaeological studies, and reassessment of older projects at the abbey between 1904 and 1979, are now casting doubt on the previous historical assumptions of the site, and the myths surrounding it.

Inside ruins of Glastonbury Abbey. (CC BY-ND 2.0)

History of the Legendary Site

Described as “one of the most romantic religious sites in England,” Glastonbury Abbey, the ruins of a monastery established in 712 AD, is the nexus of many ancient myths and historical events featuring prominent figures, such as legendary King Arthur and Queen Guinevere, the Christian Joseph of Arimathea, and England’s King Henry VIII.
Glastonbury is popularly said to be the resting place of King Arthur, and nearby locations are connected to stories of the Holy Grail. Legend has it that it was founded by the venerated saint Joseph of Arimathea in the first century, and it is believed to be the site of the earliest church in Britain. 12^th century writings connect Joseph with the Holy Grail, with him bringing it to Britain from the Holy Land in Robert de Boron's Joseph d'Arimathie.

Joseph of Arimathea by Pietro Perugino. (Public Domain)

Ruins of Glastonbury Abbey church, Somerset, England. (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Other tales say that the church was built by Jesus himself to honor his mother, Mary.
One widespread story involving the “holy thorn” has originated from the area. In that legend, on the spot where Joseph of Arimathea came to Glastonbury, he pierced the earth with his staff (in some versions made from the wood of the crucifixion cross), and a hawthorn tree sprouted there.
This, the “Glastonbury Thorn” stood on Wearyall Hill and was said to bloom twice a year (unlike other hawthorn trees which bloom only once a year). It was said to bloom every Christmas day for 2,000 years (until vandals cut it down in 2010, causing much grief and outrage, local and international). Hawthorn trees have been propagated by grafting in and around Glastonbury many times in order to preserve it.

A Glastonbury Thorn at Glatonbury Abbey, 1984. This tree died in 1991 and was removed in 1992. (CC BY-SA 3.0)

The site suffered a devastating fire in 1184. It was rebuilt, and had become one of the richest and most influential monasteries in England by the 14^th century.
This power did not go unchallenged long. The Dissolution of the Monasteries under King Henry VIII dismantled the church, taking their money and land. Richard Whiting, the last abbot of the Glastonbury Abbey was viciously killed by hanging, then drawn and quartered as a traitor to the crown at Glastonbury Tor in 1539.

• The Grail Cypher: A radical reassessment of Arthurian history
• The Arthurian Tale of Elaine of Astolat, Lady of Shalott
• The Thirteen Legendary Treasures of Britain

Researchers Allegedly Bewitched

Citing a lack of physical evidence to prove the historical legends, the team of 31 specialists led by Roberta Gilchrist, professor of archaeology at the University of Reading and now a trustee of Glastonbury, “found that generations of her predecessors working at the abbey were so bewitched by the legends that they either suppressed or misinterpreted evidence that did not fit,” reports The Guardian.

Site of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere's purported original tomb beneath the high altar. Archaeologists now say it was filled with material dating from between the 11th and 15th centuries. (CC BY-SA 3.0)

The archaeologists uncovered several surprising finds, including: a previously unknown prehistoric settlement of Romans and Saxons, predating the earliest monastery; A glass-working complex which has been radiocarbon dated to approximately 700 AD, making it the earliest evidence for glass-working in Saxon England; and it was found wine was imported from the continent to the site at an even earlier date, as shown by ceramic fragments.

Archaeological finds from Glastonbury Abbey. Credit: University of Reading

Perhaps more to legend than ‘made up’ stories

However, there are those that believe that ancient legends might have been retellings of actual historical figures and events. Author and researcher Ralph Ellis writes,

“Arthurian history is traditionally set in the fifth or sixth centuries, the era of the Dark Ages. This is a period in British history that is not simply ‘dark’ because of an economic and social collapse following the decline and fall of the Western Roman Empire, it is also ‘dark’ because it lacks any historical records. This makes it difficult to decipher what was happening in this era, and it is this lacuna in British history that has enabled the life of King Arthur to remain enigmatic and semi-legendary for so long. Had Arthur been a king of the fourth or ninth centuries, we could easily have determined if these legends were fact or fiction, but Arthur has managed to slip into a historical crevasse where there are many known unknowns and several unknown unknowns.”    

• Excavations turn up medieval bones which may be a knight and his family
• The Legendary Origins of Merlin the Magician
• British Police Join Search for Legendary Holy Grail

This raises the idea that the chronicles of King Arthur and other legends during the Dark Ages may not be untrue simply because they cannot be proven through pottery sherds or skeletal remains. It may be possible that the ancient scribes poorly documented a real king or man, or an ancient history, either purposefully or accidentally, and these stories endured. Could modern interpretations of legends now be clouding the ancient past?

King Arthur's knights, gathered at the Round Table, see a vision of the Holy Grail. (Public Domain)

The ancient myths that have resonated through time will not be so easily vanquished, if the continuing popularity of Glastonbury Abbey is any judge. And while researchers might point to the empty burial site of the mythical King Arthur as an absence of evidence, more important perhaps are the insights that come from the social history of the period gleaned from these legends.
The findings of the researchers are reportedly going to be added “gently” to the new Glastonbury guidebook so as to remain sensitive to legend.
According to the University of Reading, the main thrust now at the site is to inform future interpretation and development of the Abbey: “Glastonbury Abbey: archaeology, legend and public engagement aims to improve visitors' understanding of spatial layout, chronological development and archaeological evidence, while also exploring the Arthur and Arimathea legendary connections.”
Gilchrist explained, “We are not in the business of destroying people’s beliefs. A thousand years of beliefs and legends are part of the intangible history of this remarkable place.”
Featured Image: Glastonbury Abbey. (Flickr/CC BY 2.0)
By: Liz Leafloor