Shakespeare’s best (or worst) villains

History Extra

Tamora – Titus Andronicus
Tamora, Queen of the Goths, is a cruel and brutal central player in Shakespeare’s ultimate revenge tragedy, Titus Andronicus. Her ruthless, bloody-minded scheming leads to a gore-fest worthy of Game of Thrones.

We are introduced to Tamora as a conquered queen, begging the general of Rome, Titus Andronicus, to show her captured sons mercy. When Titus refuses and instead executes her sons he unleashes a maelstrom of vengeance, as Tamora becomes fuelled by the need to wreak revenge on Titus and his family.

Tamora is patient in her quest for vengeance. She secures herself a powerful position by marrying the weak-willed emperor Saturninus, who she manipulates as a political pawn while conducting an illicit relationship with Aaron, her equally scheming lover.

Tamora’s villainy reaches a shocking peak when she orders her two surviving sons to rape and mutilate Titus’s daughter Lavinia, cruelly ignoring the innocent girl’s pleas for mercy and mocking her distress. In one of Shakespeare’s most shocking and disturbing moments, Lavinia emerges with her hands cut off and her tongue removed. In a 2014 production at London’s Globe Theatre the gore was so overwhelming that during the course of the 51-show run 100 audience members reportedly either fainted (including the reviewer from The Independent) or had to leave.

Tamora gets her comeuppance in one of Shakespeare’s most outrageously blood-soaked finales: Titus murders her two sons and serves them to her baked in a pie. After unwittingly eating the pie Tamora is stabbed to death, as the final scene descends into a bloodbath.

Angelo – Measure for Measure
At first glance Angelo appears quite unlike any of Shakespeare’s other villains: a puritanical moral crusader whose righteousness (and name) seems almost otherworldly. He appears immune to sins of the flesh, described in Act I as “a man whose blood/ is very snow-broth; one who never feels/ the wanton stings and motions of the sense.” However, we quickly come to discover that the upright Angelo is not as virtuous as he first seems.

As temporary leader of Vienna, Angelo proves harsh and unforgiving. He takes a malevolent delight in dishing out severe justice, proclaiming in one scene: “hoping you’ll find good cause to whip them all”.

One way in which Angelo asserts his authority is by cracking down on the city’s sexual immorality, sentencing the young Claudio to death for impregnating his lover. But when Claudio’s virtuous sister Isabella comes to beg for mercy for her brother, Angelo’s intense hypocrisy is revealed. Consumed by lust for Isabella he propositions her, claiming he will reprieve Claudio if she agrees – and if not, her brother’s death is guaranteed to be slow and tortuous.

Revelations from Angelo’s past highlight further his cruel nature, as the audience learns that he abandoned his fiancée when her dowry was lost in a shipwreck.

However, Angelo is not entirely incorrigible. He is willing to confess his sins and expresses guilt, stating in Act V, Scene I “I crave death more willingly than mercy”. Furthermore, none of his immoral plans come to fruition; Isabella is not seduced and Claudio is not executed. Despite his corrupt lust and serious hypocrisy, he is one of Shakespeare’s few villains to be granted forgiveness. The Duke of Vienna pardons his crimes and repeals his death sentence, on the condition that he marries the mistress he abandoned.

1603-4 engraving of a scene from Measure For Measure. (Archive photos/ Getty images)

Richard III – Richard III
Despite having little grounding in historical fact, Shakespeare’s depiction of Richard III as a Machiavellian villain who had a physical deformity, lusted after his niece and lost his “kingdom for a horse” has had real sticking power.

A malicious, deceptive and bitter usurper who seizes England’s throne by nefarious means, Shakespeare’s Richard takes delight in his own villainy. He is unabashed in his evil motives, shamelessly proclaiming in his famous “Now is the winter of our discontent” speech: “I am determined to prove a villain”. However, Richard is also an undeniably charming and complex figure who sucks in the audience with his immoral logic and dazzling wordplay.

But Richard’s sins come back to haunt him – quite literally. Shakespeare provides us a long list of Richard’s murder victims, in a roll call of ghosts that visit him on the last night of his life. Edward of Westminster; Henry VI; George, Duke of Clarence; Earl Rivers; Richard Grey; Thomas Vaughan; Lord Hastings; the princes in the Tower; the Duke of Buckingham and Queen Anne Neville are all claimed to have been murdered by the king.

Writing for History Extra, John Ashdown-Hill suggests that Shakespeare’s claims here are both unfair and untrue. He suggests that some of Richard’s alleged victims (Clarence, Rivers, Grey, Vaughan and Buckingham) were legitimately and legally executed, while “there is no evidence that Edward of Westminster, Henry VI, the princes in the Tower or Anne Neville were murdered by anyone”.

Immediately after his visitation by spirits – the evening before his downfall and death – Richard appears to be suddenly struck by doubt. Despite the glee he formerly took in his wrongdoing, he suddenly lacks conviction about his actions: “O no, alas, I rather hate myself/ For hateful deeds committed by myself/ I am a villain”.

Goneril and Regan – King Lear
Described by their own father as “unnatural hags”, Goneril and Regan are two grasping, self-interested and power-hungry daughters of King Lear. Their willingness to betray their father and their honest sister Cordelia causes the collapse of a kingdom and ultimately leads to Lear’s descent into madness.

In the play’s opening scene the elderly Lear declares his intention to step down as king and divide his realm between his three daughters. In response to this, Goneril and Regan cleverly charm their father, hoping to grasp all they can from his inheritance. Falling for their superficial flattery, Lear divides his kingdom between the two of them, disinheriting Cordelia, who claims she cannot express her love for her father in words. This proves to be a fatal mistake, as Goneril and Regan’s feigned loyalty dissolves rapidly and their willingness to betray their father quickly becomes clear.

 By Act III the sisters’ ruthless political manoeuvrings have descended into outright violence. Regan and husband, the Duke of Cornwall, torture her father’s supporter Gloucester, plucking out his eyes and turning him out to wander blindly in the wild. Cornwall’s gruesome exclamation of “Out, vile jelly!” as he rips out the old man’s eyes, is one of the play’s most memorable – and horrifying – moments.

Goneril and Regan’s malevolence eventually turns inwards and rips them apart. Fuelled by jealousy at her sister’s supposed relationship with Edmund (another central villain of the play), Goneril poisons Regan and then kills herself.

 Lady Macbeth – Macbeth
Lady Macbeth is undoubtedly one of Shakespeare’s most fascinating female characters. Driven towards evil by a deep ambition and a ruthless appetite for power, she uses her sexuality and powers of manipulation to exert a corrosive influence over her husband, Macbeth.

Arguably a more compelling character than her husband, Lady Macbeth is generally viewed as the driving force behind Macbeth’s lust for power. While he is plagued by uncertainty about killing those who stand in his way, his wife is altogether stronger in her immoral convictions. She persuades him to pursue the Scottish throne by violent and deceptive means, telling him to “look like th' innocent flower/ but be the serpent under't”.

Lady Macbeth encourages her husband’s wrongdoing by portraying murder as both the logical and brave course of action, telling him to “Screw your courage to the sticking place/and we’ll not fail”. After Macbeth murders King Duncan (to claim his throne) she reassures him that “what’s done, is done” and cleans up the murder scene when Macbeth is too afraid to do so. At other points in the play Lady Macbeth’s manipulation of her husband descends into outright bullying. In an intriguing reversal of gender roles she dismisses her husband’s anxiety as feminine weakness, mockingly asking “are you a man?” in response to his hesitation.

Like many of Shakespeare’s villains, Lady Macbeth is eventually consumed by her guilty conscience and driven mad by her murderous actions. Plagued by episodes of sleepwalking, she wanders through the castle, unable to rid the image of her bloodstained hands from her mind, muttering: “Out damn’d spot… who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?” This is our last image of Lady Macbeth – in the play’s final act she becomes disappointingly absent, eventually committing suicide offstage.

Ellen Terry as Lady Macbeth, in a 1906 painting by John Singer Sargent. (Print Collector/Getty Images)

Claudius – Hamlet
In the first act of Hamlet, Shakespeare tells his audience “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”. We quickly discover that this is a reference to Denmark’s usurper king – and Hamlet’s uncle – Claudius.

A crafty politician determined to maintain his grasp over his kingdom, Claudius is guilty of the ultimate sin – fratricide. He has secretly murdered his brother, the king (Hamlet’s father), pouring poison into his ear as he slept, in order to claim his throne and steal his wife.

 But, like Macbeth and Richard III, Claudius too is plagued by the vengeful ghost of his victim. The spirit of the dead king appears to Hamlet, demanding to be avenged and exposing Claudius as “that incestuous, that adulterate beast/ with witchcraft of his wit, with traitorous gifts...”.

Shakespeare has crafted a particularly intriguing villain in Claudius by giving him a conscience. Unlike Iago, Tamora or Richard III, Claudius takes no pleasure in his wrongdoing. In Act III he expresses his guilt when he confesses his sins in prayer: “O, my offence is rank, it smells to heaven”.

King Claudius ultimately falls victim to his own conniving nature, as his wife, Gertrude (Hamlet’s mother, who many critics suggest Claudius genuinely loves), accidentally drinks from a poisoned chalice Claudius had intended for Hamlet. Claudius, too, meets his bitter end in classic bloody Shakespearean form: Hamlet stabs Claudius with a poisoned sword before forcing him to drink from the poisoned chalice.

Iago – Othello
 Many scholars see Iago as the most inherently evil of all Shakespeare’s villains. He spends the course of the play relentlessly plotting Othello’s downfall and his malicious scheming drives the storyline towards its tragic finale.

What proves so compelling about Iago is that his motivations for such insidious and calculated scheming seem unclear – his only desire appears to be Othello’s destruction. He accomplishes this by planting the seed of jealousy in Othello’s mind. He plots to “pour pestilence into his ear” in order to turn him against his wife, Desdemona. Skillfully concealing his nefarious intentions while winning Othello’s trust, Iago constructs a web of lies to make Othello believe in Desdemona’s sexual infidelity.

The consequences of Iago’s insidious influence are devastating. Enraged by jealousy, Othello eventually murders Desdemona and then kills himself. Although Iago’s schemes are eventually revealed and he is sentenced to execution, it is too little, too late, as his plans have already reached their disastrous conclusion.

Shakespeare does provide some reasons for Iago’s actions: that Othello passed him over for a military promotion and may have slept with his wife. However, it is generally agreed that none of these explanations are really fleshed out enough to provide a convincing motive for Iago’s scheming and profound hatred of Othello. Instead, Iago seems to have an intense enjoyment of manipulation and maliciousness for its own sake, perhaps making him the most essentially evil of all Shakespeare’s villains.

Tower Bridge: Uncovering the history of a London landmark

History Extra

Tower Bridge bridgemaster AP Rabbit and his crew. The unsung heroes of the bridge’s history are being celebrated in a new exhibition. (Tower Bridge)

 The story of Tower Bridge really begins well before its official opening on 30 June 1894. Throughout the 19th century the growing traffic congestion in London increased the calls for an additional river crossing and finally in 1876, a special sub-committee was set up to tackle the issue. After some public wrangling, a royal assent for a new bridge was granted in 1885, and the Corporation of London (since renamed the City of London Corporation) launched a design competition. The winner was architect and surveyor Horace Jones. In 1866, under Jones’s supervision, a mammoth building project began.

 After eight years of construction, employing at times nearly 1,000 workers, Tower Bridge opened in 1894 and quickly became not only an essential part of London’s urban infrastructure but also an undisputed symbol of the city.

An invitation to the official opening of Tower Bridge in 1894. (Getty Images)

 Dangerous construction work
 Steelworkers, divers, carpenters, painters, riveters, platers, steam crane drivers, holder-ups; countless different trades and companies were involved in the bridge’s construction. Most of the companies involved in the project have since disappeared and the records of their workers with them. Until several years ago, little more than the names of the major architects and engineers were known. Some of these men were real Victorian success stories. William Arrol & Co of Glasgow, for example, was responsible for the steelworks. At the time of construction Arrol’s firm was one of Britain’s leading civil-engineering businesses, involved in major construction projects including the Forth Bridge, Tay Bridge and the gantry [a huge scaffold around a ship’s hull] of the Titanic.

 In some cases, like in Newcastle and the Glasgow City Archives, lists and documents have survived. The latter holds the records of William Arrol’s staff, providing a rich source of personal stories, work records and social history. It is because of these records that we now know the names of some of the riveting gangs; the teams of men and boys responsible for hammering the millions of rivets into place that hold the bridge's structure together. These gangs were often made up of families who worked in tandem on site. One such family were the Heaneys: father John, a riveter, and his sons, William, John and Edward.

Work on Tower Bridge could be strenuous and dangerous. (Tower Bridge Exhibition)

 The salary for rivet gangs was one pence per rivet; for one week’s work in April 1892 the Heaneys were paid £11 9s 6d as a team. However, the physical exertion and likely hearing damage associated with the job must have taken their toll. Edward’s later army records describe him as 5ft 5in tall with a burn scar on the inside of his right arm - most probably an injury sustained during his gruelling work as a riveter.

 Working on Tower bridge could be extremely dangerous, and the building project witnessed tragic fatalities. On 25 April 1888, 20-year-old Richard Bacon fell to his death in the caissons [large cases lowered into the Thames to build the piers]. His death certificate, coroner’s report and the notification for his funeral are still in the family’s possession – a poignant reminder of the often treacherous work involved in building the bridge.

 The first known female employee at Tower Bridge was Hannah Griggs, who worked as a cook between 1911 and 1915. Griggs is one of the few women who worked at the bridge in the early years. We know only two more women’s names from this early period, Laura Gass, a tracer [who did drawings and copies of drawings] and Alice Lilly Bode, a clerk. It may well be that both were attracted to the job because of existing family links to the bridge. It was a common occurrence among the bridge’s workforce to already have fathers, siblings or friends working here.

Hannah Griggs, the first known female employee at the Tower Bridge. Griggs worked as a cook between 1911 and 1915. (Tower Bridge Exhibition)

 Stunts and capers
 The bridge has been a constant magnet for all kinds of reckless, cheeky and occasionally downright criminal behaviour. There is, for example, faded film footage of a strange and intriguing incident in 1917. It shows a man throwing himself off the high-level walkways. He falls for a few seconds towards the river dragging a blooming cloud of dark cloth behind him before splashing into the waters beneath. At that time the walkways were already closed to the public due to lack of use. We do not know if there was an agreement with the then bridge master, John Gass, or if the perpetrator illegally climbed and jumped off the structure, but the fact that the stunt was filmed indicates careful preparation. The jumper’s name was Thomas Hans Orde-Lees, a British adventurer and inventor, born in Aachen, Germany. His aim was to convince the Royal Flying Corps of the benefits of parachutes for the pilots of the fledgling Royal Air Force. His demonstration was successful and the bridge became considered the surprising birthplace of the Royal Parachute Regiment.

 Tower Bridge has also been an attractive landmark for attention-grabbing aerial displays, starting in 1912 with Frank McLean – the first of many fly-throughs between the towers and underneath the high-level walkways. Today, of course, such stunts are strictly prohibited.

 Capturing imaginations
 Kevin McClory may be better known as a producer and writer on the James Bond films Thunderball and Never Say Never Again but in 1959 he directed a little cinematic gem that today is almost forgotten. It is just one example of the bridge’s enormous appeal that transcends its role as a mere river crossing. The Boy and the Bridge tells the story of Tommy, a little boy who runs away to Tower Bridge after a misunderstanding with his father. He strikes up a friendship with a seagull and sets himself up high inside the north tower.

 Shot entirely on location, the film is full of fascinating views of a London that still bears the scars of the Second World War. Particularly intriguing are the views from Tommy’s lookout in the north tower of the bridge. He looks over a London cityscape that, apart from a few unmovable landmarks, is near unrecognisable to modern eyes. The contrast becomes all the more striking when night falls and London descends into utter darkness, interrupted by only occasional shards of light – a marked contrast to the shimmering, sparkling, glittering panorama that unfolds today once the sun has set.

The Frederick Cook painting ‘A Flying-bomb Over Tower Bridge’, which depicts the bridge in the midst of the Second World War. Following the war, the London cityscape seen from Tower Bridge was “near unrecognisable to modern eyes”, says Dirk Bennett. (IWM via Getty Images)

 The bridge’s appeal in popular culture remains to this day, as indicated by its appearance in blockbuster films such as Mission Impossible and even in computer games such as Assassin’s Creed and Horizon Zero Dawn.

 Uncovering the lost voices of Tower Bridge
 The bridge has always been an important workplace, however, our knowledge about those who worked there had been scant until a few years ago. Thanks to members of the public sharing their stories and our own targeted research our awareness has now vastly increased.

 Finding names of past employees of the bridge resembles detective work: far less is known than you might expect. Some details can be found in the London Metropolitan Archives, but much of it remains the stuff of family folklore, proudly preserved. Visitors can often be overheard referring to relatives who worked at the bridge and much of what is now on display in our new permanent exhibition in the Victorian Engine Rooms is the result of our many conversations with these visitors. Many of the new records come from visitors, descendants of former employees, who often keep documents, photographs and personal mementoes in the family

Stan Fletcher, a bridge foreman. “Finding names of past employees of the bridge resembles detective work”, says Dirk Bennett. (Tower Bridge Exhibition)

 The findings are often surprising, even to the families. After his death, one former employee, Edward ‘Ted’ Forrest, was found to have kept two scrap books documenting his time at the bridge. For more than 30 years he collected information about events and incidents, often forgotten but always fascinating. Thanks to his son, some of that information is now accessible to visitors. Another visitor, whose great-grandfather Charles Bull rose from stoker to bridge driver in the early 20th century, felt compelled to start her own research project and has since uncovered the names of over 150 members of staff who worked at the bridge since 1894.

 Preserving these voices is a task that the bridge’s current staff embrace. They are not just part of the story of a national landmark but also of London’s social and cultural history. The names of many of those involved in the bridge’s history are now celebrated in a ‘Walk of Fame’; a series of plaques on the bridge’s south-east footpath unveiled in Spring 2017.

 Yet there is still much more research to be done. For example, the names of the divers who in long and tiring shifts worked to clear the riverbed in preparation for the bridge’s massive foundations are yet to be uncovered. And so our research goes on. As do our conversations with the relatives of the unsung heroes who helped make Tower Bridge the national treasure it is today.

 Dirk Bennett is the Exhibition Development Manager at the Tower Bridge Exhibition. If you have any personal stories or family connections to Tower Bridge

Archaeologists Uncover Evidence of Huge Viking Camp in England

Ancient Origins

Maybe you pictured Viking raiders numbering in the dozens or hundreds, making a beachhead in the middle of the night to do lightning-fast strikes onto English soil, taking riches and women and then stealing away back to Scandinavia.

While that was true of many Vikings, archaeologists have uncovered evidence of a huge army encampment on English soil in Lincolnshire in the 9th century that was established to conquer England. The camp, set up for the winter of 872 to 873, was home to thousands of Vikings, says a press release on the Sheffield University website.

This army was known as the Great Heathen Army in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle of 865. Previous Viking invasions were hit and run, but this one was meant to conquer the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. This army remained in England for 10 years, conquering all the kingdoms except Wessex. In 871, Alfred the Great of Essex paid the Vikings to leave. In 875, the Vikings attacked Wessex, but King Alfred defeated the Great Heathen Army.

Vikings Heading for Land by Frank Dicksee, 1873 (Public Domain)

The Torksey Camp
The Viking camp was on the banks of the River Trent in Torksey and was a strategic and defensive outpost in the winter for part of the military campaign. Researchers from the universities of Sheffield and York did the studies which determined that Viking warriors, women and children by the thousands lived in tents on the site. Researchers determined the Vikings repaired ships, played games, melted loot of gold and silver to use in trade, and manufactured things they needed.

 The size and location of the camp had been debated for years, but the new research located it precisely and revealed it was at least 55 hectares (135 acres). That is bigger than even some cities of the time, including York, the press release states.

An image from the Museum of Yorkshire virtual reality experience showing Viking ships under repair. ( University of Sheffield )

 The press release quotes chief researcher Professor Dawn Hadley of the University of Sheffield Department of Archaeology as saying:

‘The Vikings’ camp at Torksey was much more than just a handful of hardy warriors – this was a huge base, larger than most contemporary towns, complete with traders, families, feasting, and entertainment. From what has been found at the site, we know they were repairing their boats there and melting down looted gold and silver to make ingots – or bars of metal they used to trade. Metal detectorists have also found more than 300 lead game pieces, suggesting the Vikings, including, women and children, were spending a lot of time playing games to pass the time, waiting for spring and the start of their next offensive.’

A Viking sword from the same 10-year Viking campaign to conquer England but from a different site. ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) 

Metal detectorists and archaeologists have found more than 300 coins and more than 50 pieces of chopped up silver, including brooch fragments and ingots. They have also found rare hack-gold or chopped up gold. Among the coins are 100 Arabic silver coins that researchers assume came to the site from Viking trade routes. 

Other artifacts include 300 gaming pieces, spindle whorls, fishing weights, needles and iron tools. 

Researchers at the University of York have developed a virtual reality show to give some perspective on what life was like in the Viking army camp. The scenes in the show are based on actual objects that archaeologists and metal detectorists have found at the camp in Torksey. The shows opens today (May 19, 2017) at Yorkshire Museum. 

Professor Julian Richards of the Department of Archaeology at the University of York said: “These extraordinary images offer a fascinating snap shot of life at a time of great upheaval in Britain. 

“The Vikings had previously often raided exposed coastal monasteries and returned to Scandinavia in winter, but in the later ninth century they came in larger numbers, and decided to stay. This sent a very clear message that they now planned not only to loot and raid – but to control and conquer.”

 Top image: Artist’s impression of a Viking camp. ( Vance Kovaks ) 

 By Mark Miller

Sam’s historical recipe corner: Sloe gin

History Extra

In every issue of BBC History Magazine, picture editor Sam Nott brings you a recipe from the past. In this article, Sam recreates sloe gin – a fruit-flavoured drink made with the bounty of wild blackthorns.

 With the enclosure of the countryside in the 16th and 17th centuries came a huge increase in blackthorn bushes, used to divide up fields, and therefore lots of sloes. The popularity of gin at the time meant that there was an ideal way of making otherwise quite unpalatable sloes a bit more exciting.

 Sloe gin is a great drink to prepare in time for Christmas and the long winter months that follow. I love the whole process, from picking the sloes to hiding the bottles in a dark corner to mature.

 I’ve never made sloe gin the same way twice – it’s always a bit haphazard – but for me the two most important things are not to use too much sugar, and to wait three months before you drink it (always hard!).

 Quantities depend on how many sloes you pick, and are very rough – but, broadly speaking, use enough sloes to half-fill your bottle, and about 50g of sugar per litre.

 Ingredients
 500g ripe sloes
 50g sugar
 1 litre gin

 Method
Wash the sloes and pick off any stems, then pat them dry with a tea towel or paper towel. Prick the sloes, or freeze them overnight so that their skins split. Add the sloes to a sterilised bottle or jar till it’s just under half full.

 Top up the bottle or jar with gin and add the sugar. Seal the jar or bottle and leave for three months or longer, shaking the jar periodically to ensure that the sugar dissolves.

 Before drinking, strain the gin from the sloes through a sieve or muslin and re-bottle.

 Note: this recipe uses a bit less sugar than most. More sugar can always be added to taste before drinking.

 Verdict: Country Christmas in a glass!

 Difficulty: 2/10

 Time: 20 minutes preparation, 3 months maturation

Will It Work? Greece Is Willing to Loan Archaeological Treasures in Exchange for the Parthenon Marbles

Ancient Origins

Despite a strong desire to return the Parthenon Marbles to their rightful home in Athens atop the Acropolis, the Greek government decided against taking legal action against the UK last year. Some probably though the battle for the marbles was lost, but now Greece is using another approach – they are offering ancient archaeological “jewels” in exchange for the Parthenon Marbles.

 Greece Proposes a Generous Offer to the UK
In another attempt to find a peaceful solution, Greece has invited the British Museum to return the Parthenon Marbles, also known as Elgin Marbles, as a parabolic act in the battle against the anti-democratic forces that keep rising all over Europe, seeking the dissolution of the continent’s unity. The Greek government has the magnanimous offer to consistently loan some of Ancient Greece’s archaeological wonders to British institutions in exchange of the precious Parthenon Marbles.

The Parthenon Marbles on display in the British Museum, London. (public domain)

How the Controversy Began and the Parthenon Marbles Became Known as the “Elgin Marbles”
As Ancient Origin’s writer Mark Miller thoroughly analyzed in a previous article, when the British Empire’s power was at its peak and Greece was under Ottoman rule, many artifacts and artworks, including reliefs and statues from the Parthenon in Athens were taken to Britain. For years, Greece has been trying to get those valuable artifacts back.

In the opinion of very few historians (mostly British), Thomas Bruce, the Earl of Elgin, took those marbles legally when he was ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from 1799 to 1803. He claimed that he got permission from the Ottomans to take the artwork. However, few historians agree that such an act was legal during periods of slavery and occupation, so the question is: how moral and ethical would this be considered in our contemporary Western World that supposedly values freedom and democracy more than anything?

An idealized view of the Temporary Elgin Room at the Museum in 1819, with portraits of staff, a trustee and visitors. (Public Domain)

Almost two hundred years after Elgin’s act, the Parthenon Marbles remain some of the most controversial artifacts in the British Museum, with more and more British people suggesting that the Parthenon Marbles should return to Greece. Similarly, opinion is divided regarding Lord Elgin. For some he was the savior of the endangered Parthenon sculptures, while others say he was a looter and pillager of Greek antiquities.

The Parthenon in Athens, Greece, from where the marble friezes were taken. (public domain)

Between 1930 and 1940, the Parthenon sculptures were cleaned with wire brush and acid in the British Museum, causing permanent damage of their ancient surface. In 1983, Melina Mercouri, Minister of Culture for Greece, requested the return of the sculptures, and the debate over their return has raged ever since. The controversy around the Parthenon marbles is just one among many concerning artifacts the British took, or some say stole, during the British Empire’s reign.

Detail from the Parthenon Marbles. (Chris Devers /CC BY NC ND 2.0)

A Solution Said to Help Western Culture’s Democratic Values
Lydia Koniordou, the Greek Minister of Culture and Sport, thinks that a civilized and democratic solution on this long-lasting controversy would send a message about Europe’s devotion to democracy during a time that many European countries – including Greece and England – are witnessing the uncontrollable rise of far-right forces and nationalistic parties. As Ms. Koniordou told Independent:

 “The reunification of the Parthenon Marbles will be a symbolic act that will highlight the fight against the forces that undermine the values and foundations of the European case against those seeking the dissolution of Europe. The Parthenon monument represents a symbol of Western civilization. It is the emblem of democracy, dialogue and freedom of thought.”

Greece has been restoring the Parthenon for many years now and has also constructed a new, impressive museum, specially designed to exhibit the sculptures, even though more than half of them are still held by several museums in Europe.

View of the replica west and south frieze of the Parthenon. (Acropolis Museum)

Professor Louis Godart, the newly elected chairman of the International Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures (IARPS), made a statement, as Independent reports, where he pointed out the imperative need of these precious artifacts to finally go back home:

“It’s unthinkable that a monument which has been torn apart 200 years ago, which represents the struggle of the world's first democracy for its own survival, is divided into two. We must consider that the Parthenon is a monument that represents our democratic Europe so it is vital that this monument be returned to its former glory.”

It is also worth noting that during Elgin’s years in Greece his staff removed the sculptures so violently and inelegantly that the heads of a centaur and a human in a dramatic fight scene are in Athens, while their bodies are in London. Preservation of art? Probably not the best words to describe this act.

Top Image: The left-hand group of surviving figures from the East Pediment of the Parthenon, exhibited as part of the Elgin Marbles in the British Museum. Source: Andrew Dunn/CC BY SA 2.0

By Theodoros Karasavvas

Scientists Solve Mystery of Iron Strap and Buckle Unearthed in Medieval Cemetery

Ancient Origins

Archaeologists digging at Gloucester Cathedral, UK, have unearthed a strap for a medieval “false leg.” The metal pieces from the prosthesis band were discovered with a skeleton in the old lay cemetery of the church. The excavation is part of the ongoing Project Pilgrim scheme to redevelop parts of the cathedral.

Clogged in Mud The pieces, including a metal buckle and a piece of the strap, were uncovered in the dig south-east of the building's South Porch. Helen Jeffrey from the cathedral told BBC , “We expected to find some burial sites and skeletons as it used to be a lay cemetery and these little pieces of iron were found in a grave with a skeleton. It was just a real puzzler and we had it taken away to be analyzed - something similar is on display in London.” Experts examining the new finds claim that traces of bone and perhaps wood, found with the band, imply that the device supported a prosthetic leg. Helen Jeffrey said, “We are astonished they found it, it was clogged in mud and looked like little pieces of stones.” The metal object is destined to go on display at the cathedral in the near future.

The Long History of Prosthetics
If you think that prosthetics are the product of contemporary science and medicine, then it’s time for you to reconsider. As DHWTY reports in a 2014 article at Ancient Origins , the origins of prosthetics has a truly ancient history. The oldest known prosthesis that is in existence is from ancient Egypt. In 2000, researchers in Cairo unearthed a prosthetic big toe made of wood and leather which was attached to the almost 3000 year old mummy of an Egyptian noblewoman. As the ancient Egyptians perceived the afterlife as a perfect version of this life, it would have been important for them to go there with their body parts intact. This is evident in the fact that a variety of prosthetic devices have been found on mummies. These include feet, legs, noses, and even penises.

A 3000-year-old prosthetic big toe. Photo source: Discovery.

Centuries later, during the zenith of the Roman Empire, we get introduced to the use of iron as a material for a prosthetic device. More specifically, Marcus Sergius was a Roman general who had lost his right hand during the second Punic War. According to the sources, Sergius had a prosthetic arm made of iron that allowed him to hold his shield. Despite these early advances in ‘prosthetics technology’, there was not much development in this area in the millennia that followed. For instance, iron prosthetic arms and legs were still in use during the Middle Ages, which was more than a thousand years after Marcus Sergius.

Artificial leg, England, 1890-1950. Credit: Science Museum, London

However, with the tremendous evolution of technology, the progress that took place during the 20 th century is undeniable. Today's devices are much lighter, made of plastic, aluminum and composite materials to provide amputees with the most functional devices. In addition to lighter, patient-molded devices, the advent of microprocessors, computer chips and robotics in today's devices are designed to return amputees to the lifestyle they were accustomed to, rather than to simply provide basic functionality or a more pleasing appearance. Prostheses are more realistic with silicone covers and are able to mimic the function of a natural limb more now than at any time before.

Modern-day prosthesis ( CC by SA 3.0 )

Top image: A buckle and part of a strap were found with the metal pieces. Credit: Border Archaeology

By Theodoros Karasavvas

1066 – how the Viking diversion cost Harold his throne

History Extra

The battle of Stamford Bridge, 1066. (Mary Evans Picture Library/Alamy Stock Photo)

Cnut’s father, Swein Forkbeard, defeated Athelred, the famously Unready father of Edward the Confessor, to take the English throne, though he died soon after. Cnut in his turn took the crown from Edward’s half-brother, Edmund Ironside, becoming king of England in 1017. He reigned for nearly 20 years, during which time he was also king of Denmark and later king of Norway.

 Unlike William the Conqueror, however, having obtained the throne of England he adopted English laws and customs and promoted Englishmen to positions of power, one such being the Sussex thegn who became Earl Godwin of Wessex. It is a measure of how entwined English and Danish affairs became, that Godwin married Gytha, the sister-in-law of Cnut’s own sister, Estrith, and their children, including Harold Godwinson and Tostig, had a mixture of both English and Danish names.

 A family affair
 It was Cnut’s early death, and the similarly early deaths of his three sons, that led to the break-up of his empire. While Edward the Confessor came unchallenged to the English throne, Cnut’s nephew, Sweyn Estrithsson, who claimed Denmark, had no such easy ride. He was immediately attacked by Magnus of Norway, who declared that Cnut’s son, Harthacnut, had promised both Denmark and England to him.

 Harald Hardrada

 Into this mixture came Harald Hardrada, one of the greatest Viking warriors of the age. Half-brother of Olaf II (aka St Olaf), the Norwegian king defeated by Cnut, he had left his homeland as a child and become immensely rich and battle-hardened fighting for the Byzantine emperor in Africa and the Middle East. Now returning home he met Sweyn, temporarily exiled in Sweden, and agreed to support him. He was soon enticed away, though, by Magnus, who was his nephew. According to King Harald’s Saga, our most detailed source of information about him, Hardrada agreed with Magnus that each would give the other half of all his possessions, and (as per the typical Norse agreement) the survivor would take all. Together they drove Sweyn from Denmark, but the death of Magnus soon after let Sweyn back in again. Hardrada, however, took up the fight once more, and they continued until 1064, when it was finally agreed that Hardrada would have Norway and Sweyn, Denmark.

 This meant that, when Edward the Confessor died in January 1066 both Sweyn and Harald Hardrada could have made out a claim for the English crown – Sweyn as a successor to Cnut’s dynasty, and Hardrada as a result of the pact between Magnus and Harthacnut and his own pact with Magnus.

 Instead it was Harold who was to become king. Harold went on to alienate Tostig, who had been Earl of Northumbria until the previous autumn when he was first expelled by its citizens and then exiled by Edward the Confessor. Tostig sought help for an invasion of England from, among others, William of Normandy (interested, but with his own plans), and Sweyn Estrithsson (no stomach for more fighting and contented with what he had), before enlisting Harald Hardrada to his cause. He promised Hardrada that half of England would rise to support him as king, since the new King Harold was so unpopular – a claim that proved far wide of the truth.

Tostig Godwinson tries to persuade King Sweyn II of Denmark and King Harald Hardrada of Norway to assist him in invading England, 1066. Engraving by L Gruner after D Maclise RA. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

 Into battle
A summer of preparation provided Hardrada and Tostig with some 300 shiploads of fighting men, around 12,000 in all, who in September 1066 followed the traditional Viking invasion route along the coast of Northumbria and up the rivers Humber and Ouse towards York. The ships were beached at Riccall, some 10 miles south of York, and the army proceeded towards that city to be met at Fulford, just outside, by an English army. Led by earls Edwin of Mercia and Morcar of Northumbria, both young men and inexperienced in warfare, this was no match for the invaders. On a battlefield between a river and a marsh (still visible but about to disappear under houses) they were totally routed.

 Edwin and Morcar escaped though probably wounded. Many more did not, forced into the river to drown, or trapped on the marshy ground where corpses were “so thickly strewn… they paved a way across the fen”. York was forced to surrender, and to promise hostages, as well as men and provisions to support Hardrada – these to be brought a few days later to a little place on the crossing of the river Derwent at Stamford Bridge.

 At the time, an English army consisted of two main elements. Housecarls were professional, well-trained, well-equipped elite fighters maintained by the king and also by the major earls. The bulk of the forces, however, were made up of the select fyrd, a militia provided from each town and village to serve for a two-month period and organised on a shire basis. They were equipped and paid by the area they represented and were generally well trained, providing a force of many thousands which could be called out when needed, usually on a rota basis, or in whichever area was threatened.

 King Harold Godwinson had spent the summer months guarding the south coast against the expected invasion from Normandy, using mainly the southern select fyrd for this. No sooner had he stood down these men, thinking the invasion season past, than news was brought of Hardrada in the north. As he raced northwards to face this new foe, it was therefore the select fyrd from the Midlands and East Anglia that was now summoned to form the bulk of a new army.

Silver penny of Harold II (Harold Godwinson), minted in 1066, showing the obverse side. (Photo by CM Dixon/Print Collector/Getty Images)

 Hardrada had returned to his ships at Riccall, and on 25 September set out from there with around two-thirds of his men to march across country the 10 miles to Stamford Bridge. It was a hot day, only five days after the victory at Fulford, and he clearly had no suspicion that the English king was anywhere near, so they left most of their armour behind. In fact King Harold had arrived at York the night before, and now, gathering his forces, set out to confront the invaders at the meeting place. 

Taken completely by surprise, Hardrada immediately despatched a swift rider to Riccall for reinforcements, before forming a defensive shield wall ring on high ground above the river. In the fighting that followed the shield wall was broken. Hardrada himself, charged into the thickest of the action, swinging his great battle-axe and almost driving the English back, before a well-aimed arrow struck him in the throat and ended the life of the mighty warrior.

 The battle might have ended there if Tostig had accepted an invitation to surrender. Instead he took up Hardrada’s banner and fought on through the heat of the afternoon until he too was slain. At that point Eystein Orri arrived with the reinforcements from Riccall, smashing into the weary English army in what became known as ‘Orri’s Storm’. Losses were heavy on both sides, but by evening it was clear Harold had won a great victory, almost annihilating the prime forces of Norway. Of the 300 ships that had arrived at Riccall, only 24 were needed to take the survivors home after Hardrada’s son had sued for peace.

The death of Tostig at the battle of Stamford Bridge, September 1066. By D Maclise. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

 But Harold, too, had endured losses. His elite housecarls, fighting in the forefront of battle, had suffered many dead or injured. So, too, had those of Mercia and Northumbria, cut down in two battles fought within five days. The select fyrd of the Midlands and north had also taken a severe battering, while that of the south had spent most of the summer guarding the coast.

 It is academic, of course, to speculate what kind of army might have been put into the field against William the Bastard had the Norman invasion been postponed to the following spring. As it was, less than a week after Stamford Bridge, news was brought to Harold at York that William had landed at Pevensey. Once again the select fyrd was summoned to duty. Once again the weary housecarls marched south with the king.

 Through the long day at Hastings they stood firm against the best that William could throw at them. Only at the very end was their resolve defeated and their cause lost. In the final analysis it was surely the losses in the north that tipped the balance, shortening their battle line, and thinning their elite forces. It was indisputably Hardrada and his Viking invaders, though soundly beaten by him, that in the end cost Harold his crown and his life.

 Teresa Cole is author of The Norman Conquest: William the Conqueror's Subjugation of England (Amberley Publishing, 2016).

What English Site is So Favored that Human Activity Spans Across 12,000 Years There?

Ancient Origins

Archaeologists in England digging to investigate the site of a future highway have found evidence of human occupation going as far back as 12,000 years. They call it a favored spot for human activity through the millennia.

 The site in Lincolnshire has turned up flint tools from thousands of years ago, part of a Bronze Age barrow cemetery, evidence of Iron Age burials and roundhouses, a strong Roman-era presence, medieval features, and post-medieval structures.

A medieval era silver coin. (Lincolnshire County Council) “The archaeological work is already providing a fascinating glimpse into past communities, settlements and landscapes, illustrating that this area has been a continuously favoured spot for human activity from as far back as 12,000 years ago,” says a news release from the Lincolnshire County Council.

 The work is being done at the Lincoln Eastern Bypass highway.

In addition to high-status Roman buildings, there are field systems, a possible vineyard, and pottery kilns from the Roman era.

Pre-Christian burial with Roman pottery grave goods. (Emily Norton/The Lincolnite)

There is also a possible stone tower from the medieval age along with a monastic grange (farm) with a boundary wall and substantial stone buildings and stone-lined wells.

From the post-medieval era there are farm buildings and a water management system, in addition to yards.

A medieval well under excavation ( Lincolnshire County Council )

 Experts say the finds at the site are of national stature in England. There are still features to explore at the site, but so far it is the largest Mesolithic location ever found in Lincolnshire and among the largest in England.

Network Archaeology Ltd. is the company doing the excavations. Chris Taylor of Network Archaeology told LincolnshireLive :

“Potentially, the site could yield some very important discoveries. We've found signs of a high-status Roman building and, more interestingly, a possible Roman vineyard, which is rare north of the Home Counties.”

He said another big find was a cemetery from an as-yet unknown era near Washingborough Road that has 18 burials. The remains may be of a monastic order, Mr. Taylor said.

The company has also identified possible remains of a 12th century tower that could have been a fort from the time of the 1141 AD Battle of Lincoln. It’s possible it also may have been a beacon or a lookout to identify any hostile parties coming near the settlement.

A Roman bone pin. ( Lincolnshire County Council )

Councillor Richard Davies of Highways and Tranport told LincolnshireLive that it’s necessary to undertake archaeological work when building a new road “to find out what's gone on here for thousands of years for future generations to learn from and understand.”

It has been known for years that the River Witham Valley has been occupied for as long as the prehistoric era and was a focal point of activity. Scholars were aware that a medieval monastic grange was near the railway west of Washingborough.

 Of the Stone Age activity, the news release states:

What is certain is that the presence of the Mesolithic flints illustrates that small communities of hunter-fisher-gatherers were exploiting the natural resources present by the river and its creeks. The later Neolithic occupants of this area were the first settled farmers, and whilst we have found flint artefacts of this period, we have yet to find any evidence of their settlements, which were probably sited away from the river on higher, drier ground.

Bronze Age arrowhead. ( Lincolnshire County Council )

 The entire length of the roadway will be investigated. This section between River Witham and Washingborough Road will end early this year, but other sites along the route will be explored later.

Top image: The site includes a cemetery of 18 humans buried from east to west in the Christian fashion from an as-yet undated era. As of press time, bits of bone have been sent off for radio carbon dating. Source: Lincolnshire County Council

By Mark Miller