Nelson & His World

Tony Robinson and his Time Team are visiting Portsmouth next week:

http://live.radiotimes.com/ListingsServ ... etails.jsp

Thanks for the heads up, should be very interesting, make a change from the usual Roman or Neolithic digs

Alaric,

Yes, thanks for the information. Time Team is a favourite of mine and although I think we might be a little behind the programmes in the UK over here, I will certainly keep an eye out for that one!

Incidentally, I sent an email to a friend recently, who is also a Friend of the Strandings Museum in Denmark (and of which we had some dealings not so long ago, re. a petition to keep them in being). As most of you know, they have a museum dedicated to preserving the remains and artefacts recovered from HM ships St George and Defence, which went aground on Boxing Day 1811, with heavy loss of life. The over 1,000 dead from the crew were buried nearby, at a site known as Dead Mans Burg.

Anyway, I asked my friend whether any archaeological excavations had ever been carried out and he thought that none ever had been and that it would be an interesting thing to do. At the end of my e-mail, and by way of a joke, I had suggested that perhaps the Museum should get the Time Team to conduct a dig 'in just three days'. He thought it was actually quite a good idea and asked for a contact address – so I sent him details of their website! I shall have to ask him whether they contacted the Team and, more importantly, whether they had a reply!

I can see it now – 'geophis' scratching their heads and finding a lot of bewildering anomolies, Tony running wildly between the various trenches, and Phil partaking of the local brew between digs!

Did anyone see this?

I was enjoying it - right up to the point when they were looking at the skeleton of the young man who had had his leg amputated when we had an unexpected visitor and I had to be polite and turn it off.

Any comments?

'Any comments?' Never mind! It'll most likely be repeated soon!

They did go on to show a very interesting aspect of the burials - that amputated limbs were buried with the dead, so a few hands, arms and legs unrelated to the skeleton showed up in some graves! I suppose they had to get rid of them somehow. They also claimed to have proved (through evidence of sporadic malnutrition in the bones) that these were the graves of ratings and the lower orders on board. Officers etc. would have been buried in their family church graveyard - but we already knew this!

Sorry I can't remember all the interesting stuff - can't recall when that bit about the amputation occurred so can't work out what you have missed exactly!

Caitlin

Yes, I heard the bit about odd limbs being included in burials - I recall that Nelson agreed that his amputated arm should be included with the corpse of the man killed alongside him - though I think I remember reading that some officers sent their limbs home for burial. (Hmm. Imagine Mama and Papa: 'Oh, a parcel from Georgie, dear. What a nice surprise.')


And here's the programme on line if you missed it - ignore preliminary advertisements:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/time ... od#3070210

I'm afraid I have the usual problem, of the programme's being 'not available in your area', so I'll just have to wait until it comes round!

I've often thought that if Nelson hadn't given direction that his arm be buried with someone else, it might either have been sent home – or perhaps thrown overboard, in which case their might have been a Time Team 'dive'!

I thought it was interesting and informative, especially in pointing out why it was built where it was, practically surrounded by water to deter absconding seamen, most of of whom couldn't swim.

Also, I thought particularly interesting - and something I hadn't thought about before - that they could detect seamen from the good state of their teeth, their having practically no access to substances like sugar which their superiors likely would have.

I enjoy Time Team, anyhow. They have covered so many intriguing subjects over the years.

- Mil
aka....

Finally got the chance to watch this last night. What struck me most (apart from Tony Robinson's "Haslaaars"), was the mention of the men being buried without any form of permanent grave marker, and in cheap pine coffins. With the likelihood that they may just as easily have been buried at sea, I wonder if this was of much concern at the time.

I think it was fairly common for the poor (which seamen were) to be buried in unmarked graves in the 18th century. Monuments and memorials were reserved for the rich.

http://family.jrank.org/pages/2640/gravestones.html

Bleeding gums and loss of teeth are two of the major symptoms of scurvy so presumably, the skeletons with healthy teeth dated from the post-scurvy period, having benefited from the introduction of lemon juice.

Yes, and ironic that the healthy teeth was an indication of their station. I understand that in earlier times (Elizabethan?) to have blackened teeth was considered fashionable, as they showed the owner had access to sugar and was therefore rich - folk even used to paint their teeth to emulate decay!

Equally ironic that the men in the graveyard were buried on land, when the sea was so close; presumably a land burial was considered more fitting. Nowadays eminent seamen are buried at sea, as a mark of respect.

MIl,

The fact that men may have deserted may have been true. However, I would have thought that equally the hospital authorities were anxious to keep the patients, many of whom may also have been suffering from diseases contracted abroad, from coming into contact with the local population and thus having a possible epidemic break out. Interesting point about the condition of the men's teeth.

Alaric,

It's very difficult for us to imagine today the conditions existing at the time – and you have to remember that 'there was a war on'! Given what Anna has said, I also assume the fact that there were no markers and that they used cheap pine coffins, was because it was a time of national stringency (at least for the lower echelons of society). The authorities also presumably saw considerable numbers of men die at the hospital and the cost of even cheap coffins etc, would have been considerable. So, faced with all these problems, I am not surprised they opted for that alternative although, as Anna suggested, would they have had better coffins in normal circumstances? I'm not so sure. I suppose there may have been some concern amongst the men's families that they may not have been present at the burial, but I would imagine that many of them were poor and were perhaps thankful that the hospital relieved them of the responsibility and expense of burying their loved ones. Given what I mentioned above about disease, the authorites may also not have been willing to release a dead body for burial by the relatives.

Kester

No, I wasn't surprised by the unmarked graves, more that they were buried in coffins at all, when the sea was so close.

The important thing, in the 18th century, I think, was to have the ceremony of Christian burial with the appropriate committal fo the departed soul into God's hands; the trappings of fine coffins and gravemarkers were secondary. In the exigencies of battle, any ceremony was scarcely possible, though the Prayer Book has a form of words for burial at sea. Presumably, burying dead patients in the hospital's graveyard would actually have been cheaper and less trouble than committing them to sea far enough from shore not to be washed up too soon and in too large quantities!

To be buried inside a church was the greatest accolade of all, of course. Nelson himself has the prime spot under the dome of St Paul's; though this well-known epitaph amuses me (forgive the digression!)

Here I lie at the church's door.
Here I lie because I'm poor.
The further in, the more you pay.
Here I lie as warm as they!

Ok, I understand you now! However, I don't think it would either have been acceptable, and certainly not hygenic, to have buried so many bodies off the coast and within sight of land, perhaps with the possibility of them being washing ashore. As Anna mentioned too the actual burial service was important as was the committing of a body to the grave, so I think the actual taking of the dead out to sea would probably not have come into it.

That this happened at sea was accepted and unavoidable and certainly healthier. I believe the French and Spanish, being Catholic, had the habit of keeping the dead on board and heaping them around the masts even at the height of battle, as it was thought most important to take them shore for burial. There are many records of British seamen being appalled by the conditions when boarding enemy warships.