Mark P

Good Evening George; With the latest picture which you have posted, one thing becomes very clear: the structure represented aft of the hatch is not associated with a sliding hatch mechanism. This is because the deck in the way of this structure is shown with multiple shading lines, which indicate an opening in the deck. Furthermore, in the centre of this, there is quite clearly a dashed rectangle on top of the deck beam between the two compartments of this mysterious structure. Due to the proximity of the ship's stove, I would say that this is a two-grating structure, forming a chimney hole, and additional steam vent for the galley, as mentioned in earlier posts. All the best, Mark P Edit: Jason posted his reply while I was writing mine; it would seem that we both have the same thought.

Good Evening Gentlemen; There are archaeologists, who are only happy when they have a trowel in their hands and are down on their knees finding real artefacts; then there are 'archaeologists' who are part of English Heritage, who believe that any decision made in less than a year cannot have been properly considered; any project organised in less than two years cannot possibly have been properly sanctioned; and anything which means that they might have to actually do something in less than three years will automatically be an absolute disaster. The reality that they and their institutional mindset are the actual disaster will of course never strike them. Valuable artefacts being lost forever is only a minor concern, and it seems does not even register on their consciousness as something which should be minimised at all costs. Allowing amateurs to have any real say in decision making, or any real part in actually finding something is a 'Dear me! What a frightful thought!' scenario for the poor dears. Re the Netflix Sutton Hoo film, I too was of a similar opinion to Roger, having read the publicity for the film; but then I read an actual account of the excavations, and it seems that not only did Netflix exaggerate/fabricate a great deal about the inter-personal relationships of most of those involved, which the publicity to some extent admitted; but they also created a new element of tension between Basil Brown and the more experienced archaeologists who took charge once the significance of the site became clear, which was never actually there in real life (note to English Heritage: the 'professional' archaeologists were on site within a very short period, and recovered all that they could with the technology of the time, as quickly as possible) All the best, Mark

Good Evening Gentlemen; One point which arises when discussing the belaying points of the rigging on Royal Caroline is the use of pin rails. As Allan mentions above, there is nothing to indicate that these were present on the bulwarks. However, the drawing which posted showing the plans received with the kit clearly shows a pin rail fitted to the shrouds. One thing I can vouch for is that this is a genuine contemporary detail, and can be seen in several paintings of the ship at different stages of her career. Unfortunately, they are not always shown on the same masts, or on all masts, although I suspect that this is artistic licence, and it would be safe to fit them to all masts, in my opinion. This is not to say that other lines did not belay in the tops, as discussed above; but it is certain that some lines, which on later ships would have come down to the pin rail in the bulwarks, actually belayed to a pin rack in the shrouds. See below an excerpt from the actual painting which is used as the frontispiece of the AOTS book in black and white. A pin rack is quite clear on the mizen; there is also one on the main shrouds, although it looks as though it is a rail fitted to the side of the deckhouse roof. This is an illusion, as other paintings make clear. All the best, Mark P

Thank you Philemon; That does indeed increase the enlightenment. So Witsen was primarily an administrator, and a member of his local Admiralty board. HIs knowledge was acquired from his father's papers, and as he also says: 'from the mouths and designs of brave masters', to which he added his own experiences etc. It would be interesting to know exactly what he meant by 'designs'. Would this be draughts of ships, which we know existed in England long prior to Witsen's era; or simpler sketched details. Thanks again to both yourself and Jan for your help. All the best, Mark P

Thanks Jan; That is very helpful to know; it would be good to know what exactly was in the drawings and writings his father had, but that is asking for too much, methinks! On a separate note, nepotism is no new thing, obviously. Thanks for the biographical note, something else which I was not aware of. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Philemon; Thank you for all the posts, which certainly underline how much we don't know. Can you answer a query about Witsen for me, if possible. I have seen articles about him before, and one of them mentioned that somewhere in his book he stated that he could only do what he had done because he had inherited draughts of various ships from his father. This would possibly mean that his father was a shipwright, or that he had close contacts with shipwrights. Presumably some of his/his contacts' knowledge was part of Nicolaes' upbringing, and would help to explain either his knowledge, or his interest in setting it down. all the best, Mark P

Good Evening Allan; Following on from your lead, I have searched through the RMG collections, and there are two similar sheets of plans for the St George of 1740 (although the plans have the date 1742) She was a three decker, and I believe that there is a model of her in either the Kriegstein or Annapolis collections. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Allan; Thanks for posting this, I have not seen one with such detail before either. There are some quite detailed draughts of Dorsetshire of 1757, and Hampton Court of 1709, which show all the beams, knees and carlings, as well as much deck detail; but they don't show ledges. So many thanks for pointing this out. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Gentlemen; Thank you all very much for your thoughts and ideas. The float with the buss is interesting; such things were very common in that period. Inigo Jones, England's first classical architect (since the collapse of Roman rule!) started his career designing elaborate settings for masques and other celebrations. The cost was normally very high, and was one of the many reasons that James I was permanently broke; and his Navy was even broker. The importance of fishing was officially recognised around this time, not just for food, but as a breeding ground for sailors, who would then (more or less willingly, of course) become available for the Navy's ships. As part of this there was a royally-sponsored organisation set up called the 'Society of Fishing' (if my memory is correct) This was open to anyone who wanted to pay the annual subscription, which was used to encourage interest in and the development of, fishing. In this way, subscribers could 'do their bit' to foster the success of the Navy, and also get some return on their money, hopefully. However, the success of fishing was very much dependent upon the success of the Navy in catching and preventing pirate vessels from operating. The records of the time contain many references to both the success of some warships in catching pirates; but also many complaints from ship owners and crew who have had their livelihood and perhaps their freedom taken from them by pirates who evaded any Navy ships; as well as appeals for compensation, and desperate pleadings for a Naval escort for fishing and merchant vessels, which dared not venture to sea because of the pirates lurking offshore. The Navy Commissioners, or Navy Board, were frequently too broke to send ships to sea to deal with this; and often those ships which could be made seaworthy had problems with both manning them and obtaining victuals; and also with getting their guns and powder delivered from the Ordnance stores. Definitely not the Navy's proudest moment! Backer, thanks for posting the link, you weren't to know that it had been discussed previously; it's the thought that counts, and taking the trouble to respond. All much appreciated. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Gentlemen; Thank you Cirdan for the confirmation. That was where I thought you had probably taken it from. Thank you also for your offer; I may take you up on it. Roger, thanks also for the explanation, that makes a lot of sense. Such recurved stems are a very marked feature of smaller Dutch vessels, where the terminal part of the stem is much wider fore and aft, and is pierced with a number of holes to which the forestay is made fast (or is it the mainstay?) The sets of square holes in Bruce's plan are most certainly a half plan view of the gratings. Such long ones are a characteristic of warships in the later 17th century, and probably earlier. Their purpose is mentioned in many contracts, and is to 'vent the smoake of the ordnance'. All the best, Mark P

Thank you gentlemen for your responses and help; Ian, thanks for the book suggestions; I have both of Richard's books (there is also one called The Warship Anne which is worth getting) and agree with you entirely about their value and level of information. Re the ancestral shipwright, was his name by any chance Baylie/Bayley, or was he related to such a person. I carried out a quite in-depth study of a Bristol shipwright called Francis Baylie, who built six ships for the Navy in the mid seventeenth century's Interregnum and Restoration periods. I intend to write an article about him one day, if I ever get time. Cirdan (is your address 'The Havens' by any chance? Hope I am correct in the origin of your forum name!) Thank you for your reference. I have most of Richard's warship-related works, but not this one. I will ask him if he can send me a copy, assuming he is the copyright holder. I also have the full set of Model Shipwright, and will look out the article you mention, which sounds very interesting. Roger, that is a very accomplished looking drawing. I will let Richard know that you have used his book to reconstruct a draught with the methods given therein. I'm sure he will be very pleased to hear that someone has taken his work so much to heart. All the best, Mark P

Good Morning Wayne; Thank you for your offer; If I find something and have trouble locating a copy I will let you know. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Wayne; Thanks for posting these; and taking the trouble to add so many links. There is some good and interesting stuff here; some of which I have already, but some not. I will check the links for those I don't have. All the best, Mark P

Thanks Steven; Matthew Baker is on my list of research items to be studied. I already have a reasonable amount of material about him, but not the 'Fragments' as yet. There are various copies/photographs at the NMM, and I will also look at the original at the Pepys Library in Cambridge. While the NMM allow photography, unfortunately, the Pepys Library's governors are not so enlightened, and will only allow copying by hand, using a pencil or computer. Thanks for the Kent link, I will check it out, as I have not seen that one before; somebody else wrote a dissertation or something similar on Matthew Baker, which is available online, without the illustrations (which is not a great deal of help!) Has to be English only, or else the scope will be too large to deal with in any detail. Thanks Jaager; I have some of V de V elder's early works, and will use them as much as I can. The Galleon is a useful source, also, thanks for reminding me. I certainly agree with you about the lack of material; great shame that there was not a grandfather and great-grandfather V de V! Still, will keep looking. The British Library may well hold something for a start. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Everyone; I am looking for pictures of early 17th century English naval vessels, up to around 1650. If any members have suggestions for a good source, or have pictures which they would be happy to send me copies of, I would be grateful to hear from them. This can be engravings or paintings, or perhaps woodcuts if these are not overly generic. If any members with access to a time machine can send me actual photographs of any of these ships, I would be unable to express my gratitude sufficiently! Also ships' fittings, armament, dockyards, or any related maritime subjects from the same period; copyrighted or uncopyrighted. All the best, Mark P

Good Morning Gary; One additional thought: I don't know if you do this anyway with your work, but as these deserve to 'live' for a long time, I would suggest that you write your name and the date you made them on the back, along with the time it took you perhaps, or some other brief note. Future generations will be very glad to know who made such lovely creations, and when. This will add an even more special cachet to what is already something very special. There are so many beautiful objects in the world, whose creators are not even a name to us, let alone the date on which their hands were at work on them. Model ships, for example, among many other things. All the best, Mark P

Don't worry, we can't smell them from here! 😁 Thanks for the post. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Gentlemen; Just a brief explanatory note here; the blocks shown are from a model which was rigged in the National Maritime Museum in the 1970s, so any colour they have is likely to be either natural or a light stain. However, the wood could well be boxwood in its natural colour, as suspected by Gregory, despite having some grain visible. I have built up a good stock of boxwood from local contacts, and one thing which is noticeable is that quite a lot of it has a very obvious growth ring pattern, even more marked than can be seen in these blocks. I know that it is boxwood, buxus sempervirens, because I marked the trees, and waited to load the logs once cut. I propose to make the frames of my Royal Caroline model using the visible grain wood, and the mouldings and planking from the creamy-yellow stuff with no visible grain. Yet if I did not know that the grainy variety was boxwood, I would lay good money that it was a fruit wood, or something else, as it bears no resemblance to what most of us think of when we envisage boxwood. I am uncertain as to whether or not the visible growth rings are annual, or only appear during exceptional periods of growth/non-growth. The wood is consistently hard, and does not have alternating layers of hard and soft timber. All the best, Mark P

Good Morning Bill; Good work, well done for staying the course and completing your model. Let's hope that it is only the first of many, and that the enjoyment increases with each succeeding project. The standard of workmanship is greater than I managed on my first model; hats off to you! All the best, Mark P

Good Morning Gary; I have just found your beautifully made workshop, and agree with all the previous comments it has earned. Such realism in the way that everything is coloured. I just love the simplicity of the method you used to show the mortar joints in the brickwork; I would never have thought of doing it that way. And all which comes after is similarly thought about and carefully executed. These will be treasured for many generations, I would expect. Lovely work, thanks for posting all this so informatively. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Allan; I have never seen anything which gives guidance on the vertical spacing of ships' ladderways for this period. I think that the best thing would be to go with the plans. I have checked a couple of the plans I have at full size, and the spacing seems to be around 10". All the best, Mark P

Good morning; I would agree with the previous posts, that they are to support a windlass. There is often a third, central post, on which the beam to operate the windlass is fixed, which is called a 'carrick bitt'. All the best, Mark P

Good Morning Tim; To expand further on one aspect of Druxey's reply above, the use of actual gold rather than yellow ochre paint was continued for longer than might be expected. Contracts for ships built as late as the end of the 17th century, in the reign of William and Mary, specify that the royal arms on the stern are to be gilded with real gold. Mary Harrison's contract for painting the ships at Portsmouth, dated 1703 (Queen Anne's reign) states that the painters will apply 3 coats of primer, & one topcoat 'of a fair colour' to the carved wreaths of the gunports, for 1 shilling and three pence each. Gilding of carved work is more expensive, at 4 shillings & 5 pence per square foot. Interestingly, the same lady's contract dating from 1676, much earlier, specifies a price for the same work for the carved ports of 1 shilling and 6 pence each. There is no price given here for gilding though, so a comparison of that cannot be made. All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Tim; If you are not sure what size something is which you intend to buy, the best course to follow would seem to be to ask the seller for clarification. Members of this forum can advise you on the various sizes of what the heart should be, but only the seller can tell you if this is the width or length. I would expect it to be the largest dimension, which would make the heart 12mm long. Its width would then be around 9-10mm (for closed hearts) All the best, Mark P

Good Evening Charles; Thanks for your post, which gives a modern point of view, and sounds reasonable enough. The degree of distortion of the fair curve in the sheer of the deck, which would only be noticeable at the extremities, most notably the bow with its rapid narrowing in width, would be dependent upon the amount of round-up required on each deck: the greater the round-up, the greater the distortion. I suspect that the practice in earlier days may well have been that all the deck beams in the midships, and probably going right into the stern, were cut with a constant camber. Coming into the bows, except where a downward curve to shed water may have been desirable, the amount of round-up could then have been increased to provide a fair sheer, which would have been a fairly simple exercise for any competent craftsman. Re the query concerning 'elastic' properties, this is only truly valid if we are talking about a monolithic deck covering, for example a large sheet of ply. As decks were made up of individual planks, all shaped to fit against each other, there is more than sufficient elasticity provided by the construction method used. Below is a photograph of the poop deck of the Victory during restoration, taken from Peter Goodwin's book, The Construction and Fitting of the Sailing Man of War 1650 - 1850. The deck beams all appear to be arcs of circles, and to be of a constant camber, demonstrated by the fact that all the edges appear to be parallel. The best proof of this, of course, would be to ask someone who worked on her, which I may be able to do. The actual amount of curvature does not appear to be very extreme, and it must be borne in mind that the poop deck of a sailing warship had the greatest amount of round-up of any of the decks; so all other decks would have a lesser camber than is shown here. All the best, Mark P