Bob Cleek

That should be the initial assumption, but working forward from there, the question arises, "Okay, what possible reason or reasons might they have had?"

The terms and phrases "tall ships," "tall ships are coming," "tall ships 20##," and "tall ships challenge" are registered trademarks of The American Sail Training Association (ASTRA.) The term "tall ship" has been registered by ASTRA with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office since 1976. ASTRA reportedly charges 15 to 20 percent of the entire budget of an event to license the use of their "tall ships" trademark.
 
Perhaps a savvy ship modeling club will trademark the term, "small ships" for use with its next model show!  

Sailing rig nomenclature is regionally dependent.  Names, like the rigs that they referred to were invented by those who used them, without reference to a nautical dictionary.  For example, can anyone explain what a “square rigged bugeye” is; or a “three sail bateau”?
 
The term “Tall Ship” that I agree is meaningless was taken from John Masefield’s poem:  “I must go down to the sea again, to the lonely sea and the sky, and all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by.”

The sourcing challenges of Polybak seem much like those encountered trying to find small quantities of Corian(tm)!

Jaager's explanation is as accurate and succinct a treatment of the issue as I've ever read. I agree wholeheartedly! What he's described is an excellent example some of the problems which are often encountered with model kits designed in that era. (Modernly designed high quality kits are better by orders of magnitude.)
 
Jack's perspective has its adherents. It simply depends upon how you feel about how you spend your modeling time. He is enjoying building his model and is happy investing his time and efforts in producing that which promises to be a very nice model that will please the eyes of its beholders and display his efforts and skill in its building, regardless of its lack historical accuracy. If "a nice looking (fictional maybe) model of an old warship under sail" works for you, Jack's your man.
 
My own instinct was to suggest relying on the somewhat extensive available research to accurately bash the AL kit to model the 1855 corvette. That would result in a model which tells an historically accurate and very interesting story which will remain relevant into the future, which demonstrates your own modeling skill, and will be a thing of intrinsic beauty in itself. However, Jaager's relating Mark Taylor's experience doing just that leads me to reach somewhat the same conclusion as Jaager: I'd sell the kit on eBay for whatever you can get for it and apply the proceeds to buying a high quality historically accurate modern kit. With an equally enjoyable investment of effort and time you'll end up with something which will be capable of communicating much more than a stock build of the AL Constellation kit can. 
 
I don't know how old your are or how much modeling you've done, but most of us who do it long enough and get old enough come to realize at some point that we've only got time left to build a limited number of models. That leads us to focus on spending what time we have left building the best models we can, not only in terms of technical building skill, but also in terms of historical accuracy. It really boils down to whether one wishes to leave behind a large collection of built kits that are destined for the landfill in a generation or two at most or what we hope will be a very few very well done works of historical research and modeling artistry that might... just might... survive to serve some useful purpose for longer than that.

The sourcing challenges of Polybak seem much like those encountered trying to find small quantities of Corian(tm)!

This is fascinating. I'm learning something here. I think.
 
Okay. I'm with you now. Sort of. To be fair, Underhill is describing a type of brigantine rig, called a polancca brigantine. I may be misunderstanding your comment, "hence the name," but I'll point out that the word "polacca" is Italian and means "Polish." It refers to "a Pole," i.e. being Polish, rather than to a "pole" as in a mast on a ship or a pole from which a flag flies. The adjective "polacca" referring to sail rigs originally referred to the sail rigs favored by the notorious Dutch-born Barbary pirate leader, Jan Janszoon van Haarlem, AKA Reis Mourad the Younger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon) whose ships carried combinations of lateen-rigged and a gaff-rigged sail on their masts. Holland was then part of the Habsburg Empire and Janzoon obtained a Letter of Marque from his native government. Thus, he flew Habsburg colors when attacking Habsburg enemies, but ran up Barbary States colors and preyed equally on Habsburg allies when the opportunity presented itself.  As a Dutchman by birth, he was captured by Ottomans, converted to Islam, and returned to his pirate trade as a Muslim.  The Habsburg Monarchy and the Poles were allied against the Ottoman Empire in the long-running Ottoman-Habsburg Wars, which may explain why Janzoon, known by a variety of aliases, including "John Barber," might have been given the nickname, "The Pole," although I can't say for sure that he was, but in any event, the distinctive lateen and gaff-rigged sail plans that struck terror in the hearts of European mariners came to be called "The Pole's sails," "Polish sails," or, in Italian, simply "Polacca" and Janzoon was well-known for his extensive use of what mariners came to call the pollaca sail plan. This was the origin of the adjective "polacca," referring to a sail plan employing both a lateen and a gaff sail on the same ship, as in "polacca brigantine" or "polancca" followed by whatever other type of rig it might be.  (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polacca) 
 
Underhill's discussion of the type correctly notes there were innumerable "polacca" or "Polish" rigs combinations throughout the Mediterranean. What he seems to focus on, writing immediately following the Second World War as the type was waning, was the characteristic that the type carries yards which may "be raised and lowered like Venetian blinds," i.e. in which none of the yards are permanently attached to the mast. In such an arrangement, a fidded mast would certainly not be helpful.  So, yes, the polancca is characterized by an unfidded mast, but the term isn't referring to a "pole" (lower case "p.")  Obviously, a lateen sail's yard (or "antenna" in the original Latin and Italian) also requires a single "pole" mast because it is lowered "like a Venetian blind" and that's where the term originated. Essentially, a "polacca" rigged square sail is one attached to a yard which is hung on a mast in the same fashion as a lateen sail's yard is hung on its mast and may be lowered "like a Venetian blind." And there you have it. 
 
From my reading of pages 70-72 of Underhill's Deepwater Sail, I must say he does provide a much better explanation of the mechanical meaning of "polacca" than I've seen elsewhere, but it needs be noted that he uses the term "polacca" in distinguishing it as a method of rigging yards, be they square yards or antennae and uses it as an adjective, just as the same word in English, "Polish," is an adjective, to describe, what in the instance he cites, is, was, and always will be a brigantine, as in the phrase he uses: "polacca brigantine." 
 
Note also that the NMM's description of the "polacca" pictured above repeatedly refers to that model in the British usage as a "brig" and reverts to referring to it in "shorthand' as a "polacca" instead of "polacca brig." The model is not, in American English nomenclature, at least, a "brig," because in American usage a brig is defined by having square sails on both its fore and main masts. A brigantine carries only square-sails on its foremast (no boomed fore and after sails on the foremast,) and a gaff-rigged mainsail on it's mainmast. (Square sails may also be carried on a brigantine's mainmast, most commonly when encountered it's a single topsail, but that is not are not definitive of the brigantine rig in American English.)   
 
With a nod to your citation to Underhill, I'll amend my answer to say #2 appears to be a polacca brigantine in American English nomenclature and, apparently, a polacca brig in British English usage.  
 
 

 
 
"Sail plan for a Polacca, first built by the Barbary pirates around the 16th century, many scholars believe the Polacca was extensively used by Jan Janszoon."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon#/media/File:Sail_plan_xebec.svg

I've never known the presence of a fidded mast to distinguish a type of rig. "To fid or not to fid" depends simply upon the length of the mast and the length of the available tree the mast is made of, so to speak. 
 
Polacre, or polacca, roughly translated means "Pollock" or "from Poland." (I have no idea if that was a term suggesting that they were indeed from Poland or a 17th century ethnic slur. Goodness knows, I don't want to offend any Poles or persons of Polish descent or be accused of posting "Polish jokes.") They were generally three-masted vessels carrying lateen sails on their foremast and mizzenmast, similar to a xebec, and square sails on their mainmasts, though not always. Some carried two masts and some carried no lateen sails at all. Suffice it to say, it would be really stretching it to call a vessel as pictured in photo #2 a polacre or polacca.
 

https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBM/slides/orig_Polacca.html
 
 
Truth be told, the closest I've been able to come to any identification of the vessel depicted in #2 is actually an 18th to 19th century Royal Navy bomb ketch, except that the bomb ketch is generally a larger vessel than #2 appears to be, a bomb ketch's mainmast would be stepped farther aft, halfway between the stem and stern, and the general derelict appearance (note the sails) of #2 sure doesn't suggest she's in active naval service. She could have been "sold out," but it's hard to see that there'd be much civilian use to be gotten out of bomb ketch. 
 

https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBP/slides/orig_Bombarda.html
 
I'll recommend Aldo Cherini's website of Mediterranean vessel ethnography from which the above drawings came... if you want to risk getting detoured for several hours in an incredible "dump" of Italian nautical trivia!   https://www.cherini.eu/ and  https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBM/ and https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/BEU/index.html
 
 
 

Indeed the rigged galiot, sometimes-spelled "galiote," model does at first glance appear to carry the same rig as photo #2, but, critically, I believe, photo #2 does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on the forward mast.  It's "Mediterranean-appearing" hull is no contraindication because, according to one sometimes accurate source, the term "galiot" was used to describe a variety of hull and use-distinguised types of vessel in the 16th through 19th centuries, most notably a "half-galley" with two masts, often lateen-rigged and also propelled with oars in the Mediterranean area in the 16th through 17th centuries, as well as a type of Dutch and German vessel similar to a ketch with rounded ends like a fluyt (as appears to the be case in the picture posted above) in the North Sea in the 17th through 19th centuries, a type of French naval vessel in the 17th through 19th centuries which was distinguished by carrying lateen-rigged sails and a bank of oars as did the earlier "half-galley" galiot, although in some instances with but one mast, a type of horse-drawn canal barge called a "galiote" in France from the mid-17th century through the 19th century, or a localized French flat-bottomed river barge with some sort of simple sail rig used to transport wine in the Anjou region during the same period.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot
 
In other words, it does not appear that the term "galiot" was ever used to specifically describe a rig, but rather was used to describe a variety of vessel, rather than rig, types.
 
The term "galiot" or "galiote" seems to have been more descriptive of the purpose of the vessel than its rig. Indeed, it seems to have been used to designate lateen-rigged oared galleys as much as anything else. The rigs of the various vessels called "galiots" or "galiotes" seem to be of wide variety, as do both the shapes of their hulls and the uses to which they were put.
 
Dutch galiot of 1740:
 

 
https://www.modelships.de/Dutch_Galiot/Dutch_Galiot.htm
 
Contemporary painting: "A Spanish xebec (center) attacked by two Algerian galiotes" (1738)
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:DonAntonioBarcelóConSuJabequeCorreoRindeADosGaleotasArgelinas.jpg
 
"A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century."
 

 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Galiote.jpg
 
"A galiote, or scute, transporting wine on a French river during the 18th century."
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Scute_transportant_du_vin_sur_la_Loire_XVIIIe_s.jpg
 
The "A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century." and the German-flagged model vessel pictured in the preceeding post carry the same rig, but perhaps on hulls of varying degrees of refinement, although that's hard to ascertain certainly from the pictures. That said, the vessel #2 in the originally post, distinctively unlike these two, does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on its forward mast. For this reason, and especially as well as because the term "Galiot" does not appear to have been in use for similar vessels (i.e. other than canal barges) beyond the mid-1700's, while rig #2 is a photograph of a vessel necessarily taken almost certainly over a hundred years later, at least, I'm sticking with the label, "brigantine."
 
In any event, the term "jackass rig" is certainly often appropriate where rig deviations from generally common arrangements occur. For many years, I owned a J. Laurent Giles Vertue sailboat which somewhat uniquely was rigged with a masthead stay from which could be flown a masthead jib as well as a two-thirds staysail, both tacked at the stemhead.
 

 
While the designer called it a "sloop," others called it a "cutter," and still others called the unusual rig a "slutter." Go figure!  

There are probably a whole lot more ship model builders with significant seamanship experience and skill than you'd imagine, and among those who have moved beyond kit building to "The Dark Side," the percentage is almost certainly greater still. 
 
It would appear this forum is devoted to the hobby of building ship models.  If one aspires to succeed in that endeavor, it would seem they'd be at a disadvantage if they didn't intimately know what it was they were modeling, but I suppose that's a story for another night, children. Be he a seaman or a landsman, a man without a sense of humor is a lamentable thing to behold. Pray tell, for those who may feel some sensitivity to the feelings of the thin-skinned, what's the "poltically correct" term for a "lubbers' hole?"
 

The sourcing challenges of Polybak seem much like those encountered trying to find small quantities of Corian(tm)!

Jaager's explanation is as accurate and succinct a treatment of the issue as I've ever read. I agree wholeheartedly! What he's described is an excellent example some of the problems which are often encountered with model kits designed in that era. (Modernly designed high quality kits are better by orders of magnitude.)
 
Jack's perspective has its adherents. It simply depends upon how you feel about how you spend your modeling time. He is enjoying building his model and is happy investing his time and efforts in producing that which promises to be a very nice model that will please the eyes of its beholders and display his efforts and skill in its building, regardless of its lack historical accuracy. If "a nice looking (fictional maybe) model of an old warship under sail" works for you, Jack's your man.
 
My own instinct was to suggest relying on the somewhat extensive available research to accurately bash the AL kit to model the 1855 corvette. That would result in a model which tells an historically accurate and very interesting story which will remain relevant into the future, which demonstrates your own modeling skill, and will be a thing of intrinsic beauty in itself. However, Jaager's relating Mark Taylor's experience doing just that leads me to reach somewhat the same conclusion as Jaager: I'd sell the kit on eBay for whatever you can get for it and apply the proceeds to buying a high quality historically accurate modern kit. With an equally enjoyable investment of effort and time you'll end up with something which will be capable of communicating much more than a stock build of the AL Constellation kit can. 
 
I don't know how old your are or how much modeling you've done, but most of us who do it long enough and get old enough come to realize at some point that we've only got time left to build a limited number of models. That leads us to focus on spending what time we have left building the best models we can, not only in terms of technical building skill, but also in terms of historical accuracy. It really boils down to whether one wishes to leave behind a large collection of built kits that are destined for the landfill in a generation or two at most or what we hope will be a very few very well done works of historical research and modeling artistry that might... just might... survive to serve some useful purpose for longer than that.

There were two sailing ships in the US Navy with name Constellation.  The first was a 36 gun frigate 1797.  The second was a 24 gun corvette 1855.   One was part of the first generation  of seriously sized warships built by the US Navy.  The second was the last pure sail warship built by the Navy.  The corvette still exists.  It is in Baltimore MD.  The city obtained it and use it as an attraction.  For budgetary reasons, the Navy pretended that the frigate was "repaired" into the corvette.  It was not.  The corvette was an entirely new vessel.  Baltimore thought that pretending that it had a vessel from 1797 would make it into a better attraction and tried to turn corvette into the frigate.  The corvette was 10 feet longer.  It  had one deck with guns.  It had an elliptical stern. When the corvette was turned over to Baltimore, it had undergone several repairs and "improvements" to match whatever the prevailing fashion was in each instance.  I would not be surprised if there was a spar deck for a while.  The definition of "frigate" means that there is more than one deck with guns, even if it was just two additional  guns on the quarter deck.  The frigate had a flat stern.  Now the frigate lived a long life, especially for something government built, built of wood, floating in salt water, and having been shot at.  In the run up to the War of 1812, the Navy - a new generation from 1797, modernized the fleet.  Check the thread here on the (mainly stern windows it seems) and which ship had how many and when it had them. 
 
Baltimore produced a hideous chimera when they tried to turn a much altered 1855 corvette into a 1797 frigate.  I think they have tried to undo that recently, but I have no first hand information.  The kit has and elliptical stern and a quarterdeck and a foredeck.  It is just plain awful.  Mark Taylor tried to make it into the 1855 corvette.  H did a good job of it - see his gallery posting - but I suspect that he would not do it again.  You can build it as presented and have a grotesque mismash.  You can follow Mark's example and essentially scratch build the corvette using the basic hull.  You can mostly scratch build the frigate by shortening the hull ad building a flat stern.   The sane course would be to store the kit on a obscure shelf and forget that you ever bought it and begin a top quality kit of a ship that really was.

What Allanyed said.
 
Like most, I expect, my practices have evolved over the years. Now, I always glue planks at every faying surface. I will also mechanically fasten a plank by with a wood peg or countersunk pin or piece of copper wire set in shellac or thin adhesive and puttied over, wherever I wish to ensure the greatest strength possible, such as in hood ends and every few frames along the less sharply curved length of the hull.  A  cleanly countersunk fastening hole puttied and sanded with a suitably colored putty (sometimes PVA thickened with wood flour) can easily be made invisible or appearing no differently than a wood trunnel. A brightly finished hull with visible fasteners requires the fasteners to be properly placed as in the prototype, but I need far fewer fasteners when the trunnels need not be seen, as is usually the case at most scale viewing distances.  I prefer not to rely solely on adhesives for fastening if at all possible. I never place fasteners which will be visible on a model except where they would be visible on the prototype. Where they are visible on the prototype, I take care to ensure they are properly scaled and not visually overemphasized.
 
What I almost never do is use CA for anything. What I never do is glue plank seams one to the other.

Thank you for your time and your valuable information.
Too many answers to reply though, so allow me not to reply to each one of you…
Starting from the term “Jackass-Rig”. There was also here (Gr) a similar term “mule” (or «bastard”) but it was referring to mix up hulls i.e. where a vessel was built with a different bow or stern from what it should be for its type…
And although the “Jackass-Rig” seems convenient, it doesn’t give the picture or the actual rigging for each vessel.
 
The term “Galiot” again is not referring to the rigs of a vessel but rather to the shape of hull not to mention me too, that there is also a confusion since I have met that, from nation to nation was also called “Fusta” and “Semi Galley”. At least for the Greeks, the term “Galiot” (Galiota) was used in a vessel similar to Chebeck, back in 1800.
 
“Polacca-Polacre” (see also Pollaccone) yes it’s a rigging term, although it’s not certain whether refers to a two or three masts vessel with square or triangular sails. I think it was-is used for naming something close to that rigging and give a general idea to someone not familiar to the terms-names of other nations' use…That’s why in my model (Thanks Tony) I name the rigging as “a version of Polacra”.
I would hardly accept this term for the vessel in photo no2, since to me looks like misset topsail Schooner or misset Bombarda…
 
So about the term “Bombarda” and “Bombarda Sabatiera”. ”Bombarda” in Gr naval bibliography, is describing either the shape of the hull, or the type of the rigging which was two masts, with four square sail in front 2-3 staysails and a mainsail in aft.
On the other hand “Bombarda Sabatiera” refers only to the type of rigging where in a type of hull (usually Bombarda and Trechantiri hulls) there are two masts with three square sails in front and a lug sail in aft.
 
I must admit I didn't expect this interesting and the long discussion, but at least for me, it turns to be a good chance to refresh some of my knowledge…
 
Thx

Yes, I think we're making progress here.  I suspect that, just like the "Galiot", the term polacca (in it's various spellings) was applied to some quite different rigs.  The ships of Murat Reis the younger may have been the origin of the name but he sailed a long time ago (1570-1641) so that usage has about a much currency as the Galiots! I think the term was applied much more widely over the following centuries.
 
It's worth noting that David R MacGregor also provides a detailed review of the rig (he refers to it as a Poleacre) in pages 130-134 of Merchant Sailing Ships 1815-1850. In the early decades of the 19th century this rig was familiar (if not common) in England, presumably as a result of prizes being bought into the British mercantile fleet during the Napleonic wars.  The piece includes a photo of "Peter and Sarah" taken at Padstow in the 1850s, that appears to be the basis of the model pictured above.  It's clear from what he writes that poleacres, or polaccas, came as both brigs and brigantines, and these terms were for a time used somewhat interchangeably, at least in the official shipping records.
 
Apparently the original research on these ships in English waters was done by Vernon Boyle and published in Vol 18 of the Mariners Mirror under the wonderful title "The Bideford Polackers".  So another spelling appears! 

This is fascinating. I'm learning something here. I think.
 
Okay. I'm with you now. Sort of. To be fair, Underhill is describing a type of brigantine rig, called a polancca brigantine. I may be misunderstanding your comment, "hence the name," but I'll point out that the word "polacca" is Italian and means "Polish." It refers to "a Pole," i.e. being Polish, rather than to a "pole" as in a mast on a ship or a pole from which a flag flies. The adjective "polacca" referring to sail rigs originally referred to the sail rigs favored by the notorious Dutch-born Barbary pirate leader, Jan Janszoon van Haarlem, AKA Reis Mourad the Younger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon) whose ships carried combinations of lateen-rigged and a gaff-rigged sail on their masts. Holland was then part of the Habsburg Empire and Janzoon obtained a Letter of Marque from his native government. Thus, he flew Habsburg colors when attacking Habsburg enemies, but ran up Barbary States colors and preyed equally on Habsburg allies when the opportunity presented itself.  As a Dutchman by birth, he was captured by Ottomans, converted to Islam, and returned to his pirate trade as a Muslim.  The Habsburg Monarchy and the Poles were allied against the Ottoman Empire in the long-running Ottoman-Habsburg Wars, which may explain why Janzoon, known by a variety of aliases, including "John Barber," might have been given the nickname, "The Pole," although I can't say for sure that he was, but in any event, the distinctive lateen and gaff-rigged sail plans that struck terror in the hearts of European mariners came to be called "The Pole's sails," "Polish sails," or, in Italian, simply "Polacca" and Janzoon was well-known for his extensive use of what mariners came to call the pollaca sail plan. This was the origin of the adjective "polacca," referring to a sail plan employing both a lateen and a gaff sail on the same ship, as in "polacca brigantine" or "polancca" followed by whatever other type of rig it might be.  (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polacca) 
 
Underhill's discussion of the type correctly notes there were innumerable "polacca" or "Polish" rigs combinations throughout the Mediterranean. What he seems to focus on, writing immediately following the Second World War as the type was waning, was the characteristic that the type carries yards which may "be raised and lowered like Venetian blinds," i.e. in which none of the yards are permanently attached to the mast. In such an arrangement, a fidded mast would certainly not be helpful.  So, yes, the polancca is characterized by an unfidded mast, but the term isn't referring to a "pole" (lower case "p.")  Obviously, a lateen sail's yard (or "antenna" in the original Latin and Italian) also requires a single "pole" mast because it is lowered "like a Venetian blind" and that's where the term originated. Essentially, a "polacca" rigged square sail is one attached to a yard which is hung on a mast in the same fashion as a lateen sail's yard is hung on its mast and may be lowered "like a Venetian blind." And there you have it. 
 
From my reading of pages 70-72 of Underhill's Deepwater Sail, I must say he does provide a much better explanation of the mechanical meaning of "polacca" than I've seen elsewhere, but it needs be noted that he uses the term "polacca" in distinguishing it as a method of rigging yards, be they square yards or antennae and uses it as an adjective, just as the same word in English, "Polish," is an adjective, to describe, what in the instance he cites, is, was, and always will be a brigantine, as in the phrase he uses: "polacca brigantine." 
 
Note also that the NMM's description of the "polacca" pictured above repeatedly refers to that model in the British usage as a "brig" and reverts to referring to it in "shorthand' as a "polacca" instead of "polacca brig." The model is not, in American English nomenclature, at least, a "brig," because in American usage a brig is defined by having square sails on both its fore and main masts. A brigantine carries only square-sails on its foremast (no boomed fore and after sails on the foremast,) and a gaff-rigged mainsail on it's mainmast. (Square sails may also be carried on a brigantine's mainmast, most commonly when encountered it's a single topsail, but that is not are not definitive of the brigantine rig in American English.)   
 
With a nod to your citation to Underhill, I'll amend my answer to say #2 appears to be a polacca brigantine in American English nomenclature and, apparently, a polacca brig in British English usage.  
 
 

 
 
"Sail plan for a Polacca, first built by the Barbary pirates around the 16th century, many scholars believe the Polacca was extensively used by Jan Janszoon."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon#/media/File:Sail_plan_xebec.svg

I've never known the presence of a fidded mast to distinguish a type of rig. "To fid or not to fid" depends simply upon the length of the mast and the length of the available tree the mast is made of, so to speak. 
 
Polacre, or polacca, roughly translated means "Pollock" or "from Poland." (I have no idea if that was a term suggesting that they were indeed from Poland or a 17th century ethnic slur. Goodness knows, I don't want to offend any Poles or persons of Polish descent or be accused of posting "Polish jokes.") They were generally three-masted vessels carrying lateen sails on their foremast and mizzenmast, similar to a xebec, and square sails on their mainmasts, though not always. Some carried two masts and some carried no lateen sails at all. Suffice it to say, it would be really stretching it to call a vessel as pictured in photo #2 a polacre or polacca.
 

https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBM/slides/orig_Polacca.html
 
 
Truth be told, the closest I've been able to come to any identification of the vessel depicted in #2 is actually an 18th to 19th century Royal Navy bomb ketch, except that the bomb ketch is generally a larger vessel than #2 appears to be, a bomb ketch's mainmast would be stepped farther aft, halfway between the stem and stern, and the general derelict appearance (note the sails) of #2 sure doesn't suggest she's in active naval service. She could have been "sold out," but it's hard to see that there'd be much civilian use to be gotten out of bomb ketch. 
 

https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBP/slides/orig_Bombarda.html
 
I'll recommend Aldo Cherini's website of Mediterranean vessel ethnography from which the above drawings came... if you want to risk getting detoured for several hours in an incredible "dump" of Italian nautical trivia!   https://www.cherini.eu/ and  https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/NBM/ and https://www.cherini.eu/etnografia/BEU/index.html
 
 
 

Indeed the rigged galiot, sometimes-spelled "galiote," model does at first glance appear to carry the same rig as photo #2, but, critically, I believe, photo #2 does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on the forward mast.  It's "Mediterranean-appearing" hull is no contraindication because, according to one sometimes accurate source, the term "galiot" was used to describe a variety of hull and use-distinguised types of vessel in the 16th through 19th centuries, most notably a "half-galley" with two masts, often lateen-rigged and also propelled with oars in the Mediterranean area in the 16th through 17th centuries, as well as a type of Dutch and German vessel similar to a ketch with rounded ends like a fluyt (as appears to the be case in the picture posted above) in the North Sea in the 17th through 19th centuries, a type of French naval vessel in the 17th through 19th centuries which was distinguished by carrying lateen-rigged sails and a bank of oars as did the earlier "half-galley" galiot, although in some instances with but one mast, a type of horse-drawn canal barge called a "galiote" in France from the mid-17th century through the 19th century, or a localized French flat-bottomed river barge with some sort of simple sail rig used to transport wine in the Anjou region during the same period.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot
 
In other words, it does not appear that the term "galiot" was ever used to specifically describe a rig, but rather was used to describe a variety of vessel, rather than rig, types.
 
The term "galiot" or "galiote" seems to have been more descriptive of the purpose of the vessel than its rig. Indeed, it seems to have been used to designate lateen-rigged oared galleys as much as anything else. The rigs of the various vessels called "galiots" or "galiotes" seem to be of wide variety, as do both the shapes of their hulls and the uses to which they were put.
 
Dutch galiot of 1740:
 

 
https://www.modelships.de/Dutch_Galiot/Dutch_Galiot.htm
 
Contemporary painting: "A Spanish xebec (center) attacked by two Algerian galiotes" (1738)
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:DonAntonioBarcelóConSuJabequeCorreoRindeADosGaleotasArgelinas.jpg
 
"A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century."
 

 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Galiote.jpg
 
"A galiote, or scute, transporting wine on a French river during the 18th century."
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Scute_transportant_du_vin_sur_la_Loire_XVIIIe_s.jpg
 
The "A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century." and the German-flagged model vessel pictured in the preceeding post carry the same rig, but perhaps on hulls of varying degrees of refinement, although that's hard to ascertain certainly from the pictures. That said, the vessel #2 in the originally post, distinctively unlike these two, does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on its forward mast. For this reason, and especially as well as because the term "Galiot" does not appear to have been in use for similar vessels (i.e. other than canal barges) beyond the mid-1700's, while rig #2 is a photograph of a vessel necessarily taken almost certainly over a hundred years later, at least, I'm sticking with the label, "brigantine."
 
In any event, the term "jackass rig" is certainly often appropriate where rig deviations from generally common arrangements occur. For many years, I owned a J. Laurent Giles Vertue sailboat which somewhat uniquely was rigged with a masthead stay from which could be flown a masthead jib as well as a two-thirds staysail, both tacked at the stemhead.
 

 
While the designer called it a "sloop," others called it a "cutter," and still others called the unusual rig a "slutter." Go figure!  

This is fascinating. I'm learning something here. I think.
 
Okay. I'm with you now. Sort of. To be fair, Underhill is describing a type of brigantine rig, called a polancca brigantine. I may be misunderstanding your comment, "hence the name," but I'll point out that the word "polacca" is Italian and means "Polish." It refers to "a Pole," i.e. being Polish, rather than to a "pole" as in a mast on a ship or a pole from which a flag flies. The adjective "polacca" referring to sail rigs originally referred to the sail rigs favored by the notorious Dutch-born Barbary pirate leader, Jan Janszoon van Haarlem, AKA Reis Mourad the Younger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon) whose ships carried combinations of lateen-rigged and a gaff-rigged sail on their masts. Holland was then part of the Habsburg Empire and Janzoon obtained a Letter of Marque from his native government. Thus, he flew Habsburg colors when attacking Habsburg enemies, but ran up Barbary States colors and preyed equally on Habsburg allies when the opportunity presented itself.  As a Dutchman by birth, he was captured by Ottomans, converted to Islam, and returned to his pirate trade as a Muslim.  The Habsburg Monarchy and the Poles were allied against the Ottoman Empire in the long-running Ottoman-Habsburg Wars, which may explain why Janzoon, known by a variety of aliases, including "John Barber," might have been given the nickname, "The Pole," although I can't say for sure that he was, but in any event, the distinctive lateen and gaff-rigged sail plans that struck terror in the hearts of European mariners came to be called "The Pole's sails," "Polish sails," or, in Italian, simply "Polacca" and Janzoon was well-known for his extensive use of what mariners came to call the pollaca sail plan. This was the origin of the adjective "polacca," referring to a sail plan employing both a lateen and a gaff sail on the same ship, as in "polacca brigantine" or "polancca" followed by whatever other type of rig it might be.  (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polacca) 
 
Underhill's discussion of the type correctly notes there were innumerable "polacca" or "Polish" rigs combinations throughout the Mediterranean. What he seems to focus on, writing immediately following the Second World War as the type was waning, was the characteristic that the type carries yards which may "be raised and lowered like Venetian blinds," i.e. in which none of the yards are permanently attached to the mast. In such an arrangement, a fidded mast would certainly not be helpful.  So, yes, the polancca is characterized by an unfidded mast, but the term isn't referring to a "pole" (lower case "p.")  Obviously, a lateen sail's yard (or "antenna" in the original Latin and Italian) also requires a single "pole" mast because it is lowered "like a Venetian blind" and that's where the term originated. Essentially, a "polacca" rigged square sail is one attached to a yard which is hung on a mast in the same fashion as a lateen sail's yard is hung on its mast and may be lowered "like a Venetian blind." And there you have it. 
 
From my reading of pages 70-72 of Underhill's Deepwater Sail, I must say he does provide a much better explanation of the mechanical meaning of "polacca" than I've seen elsewhere, but it needs be noted that he uses the term "polacca" in distinguishing it as a method of rigging yards, be they square yards or antennae and uses it as an adjective, just as the same word in English, "Polish," is an adjective, to describe, what in the instance he cites, is, was, and always will be a brigantine, as in the phrase he uses: "polacca brigantine." 
 
Note also that the NMM's description of the "polacca" pictured above repeatedly refers to that model in the British usage as a "brig" and reverts to referring to it in "shorthand' as a "polacca" instead of "polacca brig." The model is not, in American English nomenclature, at least, a "brig," because in American usage a brig is defined by having square sails on both its fore and main masts. A brigantine carries only square-sails on its foremast (no boomed fore and after sails on the foremast,) and a gaff-rigged mainsail on it's mainmast. (Square sails may also be carried on a brigantine's mainmast, most commonly when encountered it's a single topsail, but that is not are not definitive of the brigantine rig in American English.)   
 
With a nod to your citation to Underhill, I'll amend my answer to say #2 appears to be a polacca brigantine in American English nomenclature and, apparently, a polacca brig in British English usage.  
 
 

 
 
"Sail plan for a Polacca, first built by the Barbary pirates around the 16th century, many scholars believe the Polacca was extensively used by Jan Janszoon."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon#/media/File:Sail_plan_xebec.svg

This is fascinating. I'm learning something here. I think.
 
Okay. I'm with you now. Sort of. To be fair, Underhill is describing a type of brigantine rig, called a polancca brigantine. I may be misunderstanding your comment, "hence the name," but I'll point out that the word "polacca" is Italian and means "Polish." It refers to "a Pole," i.e. being Polish, rather than to a "pole" as in a mast on a ship or a pole from which a flag flies. The adjective "polacca" referring to sail rigs originally referred to the sail rigs favored by the notorious Dutch-born Barbary pirate leader, Jan Janszoon van Haarlem, AKA Reis Mourad the Younger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon) whose ships carried combinations of lateen-rigged and a gaff-rigged sail on their masts. Holland was then part of the Habsburg Empire and Janzoon obtained a Letter of Marque from his native government. Thus, he flew Habsburg colors when attacking Habsburg enemies, but ran up Barbary States colors and preyed equally on Habsburg allies when the opportunity presented itself.  As a Dutchman by birth, he was captured by Ottomans, converted to Islam, and returned to his pirate trade as a Muslim.  The Habsburg Monarchy and the Poles were allied against the Ottoman Empire in the long-running Ottoman-Habsburg Wars, which may explain why Janzoon, known by a variety of aliases, including "John Barber," might have been given the nickname, "The Pole," although I can't say for sure that he was, but in any event, the distinctive lateen and gaff-rigged sail plans that struck terror in the hearts of European mariners came to be called "The Pole's sails," "Polish sails," or, in Italian, simply "Polacca" and Janzoon was well-known for his extensive use of what mariners came to call the pollaca sail plan. This was the origin of the adjective "polacca," referring to a sail plan employing both a lateen and a gaff sail on the same ship, as in "polacca brigantine" or "polancca" followed by whatever other type of rig it might be.  (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polacca) 
 
Underhill's discussion of the type correctly notes there were innumerable "polacca" or "Polish" rigs combinations throughout the Mediterranean. What he seems to focus on, writing immediately following the Second World War as the type was waning, was the characteristic that the type carries yards which may "be raised and lowered like Venetian blinds," i.e. in which none of the yards are permanently attached to the mast. In such an arrangement, a fidded mast would certainly not be helpful.  So, yes, the polancca is characterized by an unfidded mast, but the term isn't referring to a "pole" (lower case "p.")  Obviously, a lateen sail's yard (or "antenna" in the original Latin and Italian) also requires a single "pole" mast because it is lowered "like a Venetian blind" and that's where the term originated. Essentially, a "polacca" rigged square sail is one attached to a yard which is hung on a mast in the same fashion as a lateen sail's yard is hung on its mast and may be lowered "like a Venetian blind." And there you have it. 
 
From my reading of pages 70-72 of Underhill's Deepwater Sail, I must say he does provide a much better explanation of the mechanical meaning of "polacca" than I've seen elsewhere, but it needs be noted that he uses the term "polacca" in distinguishing it as a method of rigging yards, be they square yards or antennae and uses it as an adjective, just as the same word in English, "Polish," is an adjective, to describe, what in the instance he cites, is, was, and always will be a brigantine, as in the phrase he uses: "polacca brigantine." 
 
Note also that the NMM's description of the "polacca" pictured above repeatedly refers to that model in the British usage as a "brig" and reverts to referring to it in "shorthand' as a "polacca" instead of "polacca brig." The model is not, in American English nomenclature, at least, a "brig," because in American usage a brig is defined by having square sails on both its fore and main masts. A brigantine carries only square-sails on its foremast (no boomed fore and after sails on the foremast,) and a gaff-rigged mainsail on it's mainmast. (Square sails may also be carried on a brigantine's mainmast, most commonly when encountered it's a single topsail, but that is not are not definitive of the brigantine rig in American English.)   
 
With a nod to your citation to Underhill, I'll amend my answer to say #2 appears to be a polacca brigantine in American English nomenclature and, apparently, a polacca brig in British English usage.  
 
 

 
 
"Sail plan for a Polacca, first built by the Barbary pirates around the 16th century, many scholars believe the Polacca was extensively used by Jan Janszoon."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon#/media/File:Sail_plan_xebec.svg

Indeed the rigged galiot, sometimes-spelled "galiote," model does at first glance appear to carry the same rig as photo #2, but, critically, I believe, photo #2 does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on the forward mast.  It's "Mediterranean-appearing" hull is no contraindication because, according to one sometimes accurate source, the term "galiot" was used to describe a variety of hull and use-distinguised types of vessel in the 16th through 19th centuries, most notably a "half-galley" with two masts, often lateen-rigged and also propelled with oars in the Mediterranean area in the 16th through 17th centuries, as well as a type of Dutch and German vessel similar to a ketch with rounded ends like a fluyt (as appears to the be case in the picture posted above) in the North Sea in the 17th through 19th centuries, a type of French naval vessel in the 17th through 19th centuries which was distinguished by carrying lateen-rigged sails and a bank of oars as did the earlier "half-galley" galiot, although in some instances with but one mast, a type of horse-drawn canal barge called a "galiote" in France from the mid-17th century through the 19th century, or a localized French flat-bottomed river barge with some sort of simple sail rig used to transport wine in the Anjou region during the same period.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot
 
In other words, it does not appear that the term "galiot" was ever used to specifically describe a rig, but rather was used to describe a variety of vessel, rather than rig, types.
 
The term "galiot" or "galiote" seems to have been more descriptive of the purpose of the vessel than its rig. Indeed, it seems to have been used to designate lateen-rigged oared galleys as much as anything else. The rigs of the various vessels called "galiots" or "galiotes" seem to be of wide variety, as do both the shapes of their hulls and the uses to which they were put.
 
Dutch galiot of 1740:
 

 
https://www.modelships.de/Dutch_Galiot/Dutch_Galiot.htm
 
Contemporary painting: "A Spanish xebec (center) attacked by two Algerian galiotes" (1738)
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:DonAntonioBarcelóConSuJabequeCorreoRindeADosGaleotasArgelinas.jpg
 
"A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century."
 

 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Galiote.jpg
 
"A galiote, or scute, transporting wine on a French river during the 18th century."
 

 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galiot#/media/File:Scute_transportant_du_vin_sur_la_Loire_XVIIIe_s.jpg
 
The "A Dutch galiot from Willaumez's Dictionnaire de la Marine in the 17th century." and the German-flagged model vessel pictured in the preceeding post carry the same rig, but perhaps on hulls of varying degrees of refinement, although that's hard to ascertain certainly from the pictures. That said, the vessel #2 in the originally post, distinctively unlike these two, does not carry a boomed fore and aft sail on its forward mast. For this reason, and especially as well as because the term "Galiot" does not appear to have been in use for similar vessels (i.e. other than canal barges) beyond the mid-1700's, while rig #2 is a photograph of a vessel necessarily taken almost certainly over a hundred years later, at least, I'm sticking with the label, "brigantine."
 
In any event, the term "jackass rig" is certainly often appropriate where rig deviations from generally common arrangements occur. For many years, I owned a J. Laurent Giles Vertue sailboat which somewhat uniquely was rigged with a masthead stay from which could be flown a masthead jib as well as a two-thirds staysail, both tacked at the stemhead.
 

 
While the designer called it a "sloop," others called it a "cutter," and still others called the unusual rig a "slutter." Go figure!  

Gentlemen; just a couple of points:
 
1. Please keep the discussion on a rational and polite basis at all times.  If it degenerates into arguments and name calling it may have to be closed down.
 
2.  Please also remember that although many of these vessels resemble staysail schooners, they are, in fact, specialised Mediterranean fishing and trading rigs and will have their own special local names, which no one has investigated as yet.
 
Have fun trying to figure them out! 
 
John

It's a poor form of discussion when the first resort is to denigrate anyone who disagrees with you. Poorer still to double down on that. And just for the record, I've done many thousands of miles at sea, under sail. 😀 
 
Anyway, jackasses aside 😁, back to rig #2.  On further reflection, it rather resembles a Galiot (per the model below), although the hull looks much more Mediterranean than North Sea, and I think the Galiot was very much a rig of the North Sea and the Baltic.  I am sure that all these rigs had local names, it would be interesting to know if there was a formal nomenclature for them.
 

 
The USN Boxer is most undoubtedly a brigantine, no debate there.  It has a fully square-rigged foremast, not a schooners foremast with a couple of square topsails.  The lower mast is short - barely half the height of the lower mainmast, so it sets a forecourse, much wider than it is deep, rather than a square foresail, much deeper than it is wide.  This is topped by a single topsail, a single topgallant and a royal.   In all of that it bears very little resemblance to the rig in #2.
 
Ketches commonly carried square sails on the foremast in older times.  There are a number of well-known model subjects of such vessels - Speedwell, Granado etc. It's only in more recent times that the ketch rig became a purely fore-and-aft rig.
 
As DrPR notes, there are many variations on all of these rigs, some of which defy the most fervent taxonomist.  
 
 

Again I have to agree with Bob Cleek about that "topsail staysail ketch/hermaphrodite brig/brigantine" or whatever you want to call it ((the second picture in Thananasis' original post).
 
I did find a reference to a "topsail ketch" in the Unusual Rigs chapter of Harold Underhill's Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship & Ocean Carrier, Brown Son and Ferguson, Ltd., Glasgow, 1972, page 229. Yes, Underhill was British, and we all know they actually think they invented the English language, but I have to be cautious what I say here because my wife was British. Yes dear, who is to say that the British terminology is less valid than any other?
 
He mentions a "schooner-ketch" and says "Another name, and I think a more appropriate one, is topsail ketch." But, as Bob mentions, a ketch would have a gaff sail on the main (fore) mast. Underhill says "The [main] gaff and boom are proportionately longer than would be the case with the schooner because the mizzen mast is stepped much further aft." Picture 2 doesn't have a boom on the fore mast, so it isn't a true ketch. So maybe it was a ketch-brigantine? But whoever heard that term used?
 
However, some sources just say a two masted vessel with the fore/main mast taller than the aft/mizzen is a ketch it the mizzen is stepped forward of the rudder. By that definition is is a ketch.
 
On page 228 Underhill also discusses the staysail schooner with a topsail on the fore mast and asks "Is she a schooner or brigantine? Your guess is as good as mine, for to the best of my knowledge the rig has never been defined and really has no name." ... "Perhaps the best description would be "square-rigged staysail-schooner", anyway the reader can take his choice." He goes on for another half page discussing variants of this rig and what they might be called.
 
And Bob gets a star for identifying the "fisherman's topsail."
 
Underhill has 17 pages of "unusual rigs" and it all reinforces my belief that just about anything that was possible to rig has probably floated somewhere at some time. And even common rigs have different names in different places and different times.
 
****
 
In Underhills Sailing Ship Rigs and Rigging, Brown, Son and Ferguson, Glasgow, 1969, page 4 he uses the term "Jackass-Rig" as any unusual combination of masts or sails. So in Thanasis' original post there are pictures of jackass-rig 1, jackass-rig 2, jackass-rig 3 and another jackass-rig 1.
 
But he does mention the "hermaphrodite brig" with square rigged fore mast (no gaff sail) and fore-and-aft rigged main mast. The illustration shows staysails between the masts. He says the term hermaphrodite brig is no longer used and it is called a brigantine. He shows sail plans for hermaphrodite brigs Raven and Juan De La Vega on page 46 and 48.
 
He also describes staysail schooners as "... all canvas, with the exception of the main, is set on fore-and-aft stays and saves the weight of spars aloft." The main sail is rigged to a boom, but may be gaff rigged or just a triangular "Bermuda rig." He shows a plan for the very unusual three masted staysail schooner John Williams V."