Glory of the Seas 1869 by rwiederrich - FINISHED - 1/96 - medium clipper

[ClipperFan]

Rob, an elegant solution keeping in line with historically accurate documentation. As usual, you've done a masterful job.

Edited September 28, 2022 by ClipperFan
grammar correction

[rwiederrich]

27 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, an elegant solution keeping in line with historically accurate documentation. As usual, you've done a masterful job.

Thanks Rich.  It was my best  choice of many possible options.  I agree, it keeps in line with historical evidence.

I pondered this solution for some time, knowing a  means to belay the jib downhauls was a necessity, but lacking ample photographic evidence, placed me in a precarious situation.  I also didn't want to just throw some pin rail on her forecastle, like so many other clippers and call it all good.....no...... I also needed to tackle two separate issues....the pin rail and the stanchion mounting.     Note: I still have to rig the bowsprit stirrups and footrope.

 

My next, *tackle* will be the jib Halliards/downhauls to include their double sided sheets.   I, think I've arrived at the most accurate means they can be  depicted without sails.  I will work on that tonight.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Finished off the bowsprit foot rope and I secured the fish tackle. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Spent time working on the jib braces, halliards, and downhauls.  
 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

for goodness sake Rob, those bowsprit lines look like some spider net from discovered an ancient mythical machine from atlantis :)) it cant get more complicated that isnt it. 

other than that, impressive work . 

V. 

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

for goodness sake Rob, those bowsprit lines look like some spider net from discovered an ancient mythical machine from atlantis :)) it cant get more complicated that isnt it. 

other than that, impressive work . 

V. 

Thanks Vlad....but it's gonna get a bit more congested.....since I still need to add 2 more sets of jib sail pendants and their reef tackle.   And 12 rope coils to finish it all off.

 

Each line has its own small *Hook* to secure it to its eyebolt, as well as the Halliard blocks have hooks.  Each one is roughly 2.5mm long.  Tiny stuff...to keep it all close to scale.  I use steel wire Not copper......so it best matches the real thing.

 

Rob 

Edited September 30, 2022 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

Rob, seeing this incredibly complex latticework myriad lines, I reiterate what I said months ago. I sure hope you wrote down a guideline of where everything goes. I have a strong feeling Vladimir's gonna need it!

[rwiederrich]

Just spent a little time tonight rigging the next jib sail halliard, downhaul and Pennant sheet gear. 
 

Rob

Edited September 30, 2022 by rwiederrich

[rwiederrich]

Down the deck, forward. 
 

Rob

Edited September 30, 2022 by rwiederrich

[rwiederrich]

A few extras for good measure. 
 

Rob

Edited September 30, 2022 by rwiederrich

[druxey]

Sweet!

[Maury S]

great model and great photos

Maury

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir,

Rob and I are members of a Facebook group "The Era of Clipper Ships". The moderator just posted a link to Hyland Granby Antiques, located in Cape Cod. Apparently they recently acquired the original Grecian Goddess 'Athena' from Glory of the Seas. Here are some of the sharpest, most detailed images I've ever seen of his spectacularly beautiful piece of carving. 

[rwiederrich]

Notice the difference in carving technique and smoothness?   The original was modified and smoothed out.  Probably when they added her right fore arm and right calf/foot.

 

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by rwiederrich

[rwiederrich]

20 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Hyland Granby Antiques, located in Cape Cod.

Hey...they are over in your neck of the woods.  I think a road trip is in order...so you can put your own eyes on this magnificent piece of McKay history.

 

Rob

[druxey]

Is this actually the original figure reworked? There are other differences, such as the gap between the left wrist and breast and very different folds in the cloak and dress.

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Hey...they are over in your neck of the woods.  I think a road trip is in order...so you can put your own eyes on this magnificent piece of McKay history.

 

Rob

Rob,

Agreed. I have to arrange for my family's time off from work and find a local motel. It's over 3 hour's drive, one way. I already shared the idea with my wife and she knows, from my decades old obsession with all things surrounding Glory of the Seas, how important this is to me.

[ClipperFan]

29 minutes ago, druxey said:

Is this actually the original figure reworked? There are other differences, such as the gap between the left wrist and breast and very different folds in the cloak and dress.

Druxey, this is most definitely the original Grecian Goddess 'Athena' figurehead from the McKay clipper. The left wrist and breast gap, as well as noticably different folds, I attribute to the finer photography done with these images. Keep in mind, we've only seen mostly low rez pictures of the restored figurehead after having years of layers of paint removed. The scenes of her still mounted in place include those multiple layers of years of paint overlay, which ultimately blur finer details of her clearly delicate carving.   

[druxey]

I understand that layers of paint, etc, will change the appearance, but the folds of drapery around her left leg look very different. If the original figure, there must have been repairs carried out, not just overpainting.

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, druxey said:

I understand that layers of paint, etc, will change the appearance, but the folds of drapery around her left leg look very different. If the original figure, there must have been repairs carried out, not just overpainting.

Druxey, Agreed. Rob too has identified that, besides obvious gouges out of her left dress, at one point the figurehead's entire left lower leg was missing, in addition to her missing right arm and some minor damage to her left elbow.

It's amazing how different relatively, indistinguishable flat folds appear on her dress in the port image where she's still mounted in place. Compare that  to the more refined gracefully falling triple curves of the left side on the restored figurehead. It's like they're two different carvings. However, knowing the sterling reputation of the new curators, it's improbable that this isn't the original.

[druxey]

Well, either way, the current state of the carving is absolutely beautiful.

[rwiederrich]

7 hours ago, druxey said:

I understand that layers of paint, etc, will change the appearance, but the folds of drapery around her left leg look very different. If the original figure, there must have been repairs carried out, not just overpainting.

She had to have an arm added…….and a lower left leg.  It isn’t beyond reason to think greater repairs and polishing of her features and attire happened at that time

 

Rob

Edited October 5, 2022 by rwiederrich

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Good observations on the figurehead, to be sure.  A photo nearly from the front in the India House  shows the left foot forward concealing the right from that perspective.

  Yet an image (from p.9 of this log) at nearly the same angle shows the right foot 'crossed' behind the left.  This image appears to be an artists impression as explained below.

  A picture of the India House figurehead from a lower point of view and a different side angle - the point of view of persons walking up the stairs of the India House (and likely the artist) - gives the illusion of the 'crossed' foot ... when it is in reality well behind.  Ergo the artist put that into the painting as he saw it from below, yet he also wanted to portray the body from a higher perspective.

 

   Arguably, one can see differences in the drapery on the left leg between the India House figurehead and photos of the figurehead on the Glory late in her career.  Yet there is convincing provenance that they are both one in the same ... with significant restoration and rehabilitation lovingly done between the time she was at the prow of the Glory and her installation in the India House.

 

  We know that the Glory was McKay'slast clipper ... and his masterpiece.  We know of her career as well.  Documentation held by Hyland Granby Antiques (the present owner since 2021 - Lord knows what they had to pay to get this masterpiece) show that James A. Farrell, president of U.S. Steel in 1923, bought the figurehead prior to the ship's destruction that year.  Farrell was one of the founders of the India House, to whom he gave the Glory's figurehead after restoration.

 

  Richard C. McKay wrote a preface to a book in 1927 that James Farrell had always been interested in Donald McKay and his ships, especially the Glory of the Seas - which his father, Captain G. Farrell commanded and sailed with young James Farrell around the Horn.  Farrell was not just a wealthy collector, but a lover of the Glory from his youth.  He was intimately familiar with the ship and desired to save her most beautiful feature - not for himself, but for the public to view and appreciate for what (he thought) would be in perpetuity.

 

  Obviously, expert repairs at Farrell's expense were done to reconstruct the missing arm and foot, removing many layers of paint in the process.  And it seems most likely that any previous remodeling or repair of the leg drapery in question (perhaps evidenced by blocks or pieces of added wood not original to the sculpture - sometimes found in figureheads or 'cigar store' figures) was corrected in a manner consistent with the exquisite artistry evident in the surviving original work - most of which survived intact.

 

  We are lucky that James Farrell was as sentimental and forward-thinking as he was.          Johnny

 

EDIT:   'Came across an old newspaper article (too long for everything here) that shed some melancholy light on the subject figurehead (among other aspects of the Glory).  'Brough a tear to my sentimental eye, it did - so I'm adding it here as related by the reporter from the 'old salt' who told the tale.  I have no reason to disbelieve it, but if not entirely true - it ought to be.

 

Exerpt from: Transformation of the Clipper "The Glory of the Seas"

By Woodbury S. Brintnall

(Article appeared in the newspaper: San Francisco Call – vol.110 number 116,   24 Sept. 1911)

 

  Of the ships that pass in the night are told many tales passing strange.  At night, when outgoing waters of an ebbing tide pull on straining hawsers, you may listen to this—the story of a once proud and mighty ship.

   You may come to know of the sailor, John Martin, and his sweetheart, long since dead, whose beauty yet lives in the figurehead of the last of the clipper ships, “The Glory of the Seas.”

“It looks as though it had a history,” I suggested to the old sailorman, as an opening wedge.

“It has,” said he. “Her name was Elizabeth—Elizabeth le Forgue,” he said, “and I guess that even she don't care—any more. There's a bit of a story about that figurehead, too. It was done from life. But lord, even the man who carved it, he's been dead years."

 

  "When the Glory of the Seas was launched she was, folks said, the most likely lookin' girl in East Boston.  You see, she was to marry him, John Martin, when he come back from the ship's first voyage ’round the Horn to ’Frisco in ’69. He was a likely lad—a little wild, perhaps, and he didn't go back so soon as promised.  There was people said she did it a purpose, and some said it was an accident, but, anyways, she was drowned off one of her father's fishing boats, and when the sea gave up its dead—one of her arms was gone.” 

 

  The moon shone down on the figure of “Elizabeth”—Elizabeth le Forgue. She had but one arm!  “And this figurehead,” I exclaimed.

  “I'm telling you,” answered he, “it's curious like, but the day the girl was drowned the sea was running strong, and when it cleared, the ship's figurehead had but one arm. Course, sailormen are superstitious—but they've never fitted one since that has stayed on.   Martin, he sailed some voyages after, and the men aboard mostly thought him queer because he was always a working on that figurehead, beautifying Elizabeth. Sort of duty it was, with him, I guess. He was lost overboard in the eighties in a storm— and ever since she's had but one arm. The company, they don't care—it's knives and grinders now, and salmon and dollars. And tomorrow we'll leave, and pretty soon we'll smell to the high heavens of salmon. I guess ‘Elizabeth’ don't much care. Good night.”

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2022 by Snug Harbor Johnny
further information

[rwiederrich]

Good write up Jonny. 
 

One other note:….…. Her replaced left led and foot aren’t exactly a true representation either.  Her original foot curved down as if standing on a curved rock…..but her replacement foot demonstrates that the ball of the foot is supporting the weight as the toes are bent as that of a runner in a starting gate position.   The restoration craftsman had  the freedom to exercise a bit of artistic license along with his (correction) of some apparent (unfinished) details. 
 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

wow Thanks Rich and Everyone else to input regarding figurehead. what a magnificent input. I myself thought that goddess seen on black white photo Rob showed must be different . that drapery looks so unnatural almost amateurish to me comparing original sculpture....

perhaps i will try her. i have month till all ropes and blocks fo glory  arrives and already making sails. 

@Dear Rob, i have some issue regarding bowsprit rigging chains. accurate measuring is telling me 0.2 mm chain ! i bet its jewellery necklace category. 

Rob is the source for your chain have such tiny chains? 

otherwise all other sources i have possible is 0.5mm and 1mm. to make it bigger.....

Thanks much. V. 

[ClipperFan]

6 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Good write up Jonny. 
 

One other note:….…. Her replaced left led and foot aren’t exactly a true representation either.  Her original foot curved down as if standing on a curved rock…..but her replacement foot demonstrates that the ball of the foot is supporting the weight as the toes are bent as that of a runner in a starting gate position.   The restoration craftsman had  the freedom to exercise a bit of artistic license along with his (correction) of some apparent (unfinished) details. 
 

Rob

Rob I agree with your compliment of Snug Harbor Johnny's summation. It was pleasant and insightful at the same time. Another observation I have to add reverts back to our initial conversations regarding viewer's perspective, even camera's distortion. In this case, the greater complexities  of the human figure combined with those gracefully falling folds of a dress all combine to create dramatically different observations of the same sculpture from varying positions. Viewing the left side of the figurehead, even when the camera's viewpoint is approximately dead center, her feet look disproportionately small. This challenging situation explains why I personally have had "the devils own time" over the past 14 years trying to arrive at an a accurate representation of her. 

In addition, Rob's astute observation of the curving position of Athena's left outstretched foot is correct. From the sole picture of her proudly mounted at the prow in the famous 1869 PEM - Black scene of Glory of the Seas on the launch ways, we can see her left foot curves comfortably around a lovely, carved and gilded billet head. Apparently when she was removed in the 1920s, nobody had the foresight to preserve this lovely original mounting feature. Placing her stance on a flat surface would of neccesity required a different stance to make her pose believable. Same goes for her oddly out of proportion right arm. Again the same photo shows a gracefully sculpted right arm naturally reaching back, comfortably grasping her long flowing garb behind her. Unfortunately now, that same right arm looks like she's been working out more than with her left. Notwithstanding, I am still completely blown away with the serene naturalness of Athena, even with these numerous flaws. I get the impression that Elizabeth Le Forgue who modeled for her, besides being a beauty, must also have been one hell of a woman. Thank God her Athena figurehead was spared. Still, I can't help wishing McKay's final masterpiece itself somehow could have been saved as well. What a colossal loss to America and humanity....

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

wow Thanks Rich and Everyone else to input regarding figurehead. what a magnificent input. I myself thought that goddess seen on black white photo Rob showed must be different . that drapery looks so unnatural almost amateurish to me comparing original sculpture....

perhaps i will try her. i have month till all ropes and blocks fo glory  arrives and already making sails. 

@Dear Rob, i have some issue regarding bowsprit rigging chains. accurate measuring is telling me 0.2 mm chain ! i bet its jewellery necklace category. 

Rob is the source for your chain have such tiny chains? 

otherwise all other sources i have possible is 0.5mm and 1mm. to make it bigger.....

Thanks much. V. 

Vlad....I use the smallest chain I can find, and that is 42 LPI.  I got it at Cast your Anchor, but I think they are out of stock currently.  Do a net search.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

37 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Still, I can't help wishing McKay's final masterpiece itself somehow could have been saved as well. What a colossal loss to America and humanity....

What I find interesting is, why...if in fact, James Ferrell was such a fan of McKay's vessels and particularly Glory of the Seas, since his father was captain of her and he himself rounded the horn in her as a boy.....and if he was the President of a large steel firm...why just save Glory's figurehead.....why not save the entire vessel?  She was only worth $4000 dollars at the time, and could have easily been purchased and restored by a man who actually had the means and supposedly the *Passion* for her.   A simple captain purchased Cutty Sark and restored her for posterity....how is it beyond reason to think a steel mogul could not perform the same?

 

I suggest...beyond *passion* and *Love of*....business wise, there was no money in it for him.  It's one thing to appear humanitarian, *One who gives back to the people*...when it costs little of them......then it is, when a more monumental contribution, that would have ultimately greater consequences is not made because...it has little to no return value for them.  MHVA

 

 

  Rob

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

     Rob, your point is well taken about "philanthropy", in that many among the millionaires at the turn of the 20th century (who often did a lot of questionable - even ugly - things to gain their fortunes) sought to whitewash their reputation by publicly giving away a relatively small portion of their vast holdings to some charitable institution ... hmmmm ... often with their NAME attached to it, just so everyone knows who the benefactor was.  Perhaps the steel magnate Carnegie may have been more 'real' since the lion's share of his money was given away, as he didn't believe in multi-generational 'dynasties' based on inherited wealth.

 

  Whatever, the 'token charity' trend continues to this day ... with perhaps Bill and Melinda Gates being among the exceptions where a majority (something over 50%) of their fortune appears to be going to worthy causes.  Most others are hung up about 'naming rights' and publicity.  I suspect that Farrell DID desire the Glory's figurehead for sentimental reasons, and he didn't make any money on it - rather it was donated for display.  Of course, the ship was in a terrible state at the end - and would have required some big dollars to restore/rebuild her to ship-shape condition ... as well as maintain her in a permanent mooring (or perhaps set-up on dry land as a museum, thereby avoiding leakage over time and even more maintenance). That would have taken a very large foundation trust fund indeed.

 

   I've no idea the extent of Farrell's commitments or how he was financially extended - and this may prompt me to research his personal life to get a better perspective.  So at this point, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt ... at least half way.  BTW, the book I mentioned is titled: Some Famous Sailing Ships and their Builder Donald McKay - published January 1st, 1928.  I found a later edition with many illustrations and an attractive color dust jacket on Amazon (there are others available) with free shipping (but sales tax) for a total of $30 and change.  I've ordered it and should get it next week.  I want to see everything that Richard C. McKay had to say about the Glory, and any other McKay clippers of note.

[rwiederrich]

Philanthropy usually has self motivated implications attached to it.  Things have unfolded as they have and we are left only with disillusioned speculation.  We are fortunate that Glory lived as long as she did....so we can have ample photographic evidence of her transformation from magnificent clipper to a funeral pyre.

 

I have several copies of the book, *Some Famous Sailing Ships and their Builder Donald McKay*, myself and it is a must have print for any clipper ship library.  However, as I recall, I don't think there is much concerning Glory of the Seas...surprisingly enough.  If, I'm not mistaken.

 

The exhaustive works by Michael Mjelde on the subject...contain copious amounts of historical information.