HMS Perseus by Thukydides - 1:64 - POB - Sphinx Class 6th Rate

[TJM]

11 minutes ago, scrubbyj427 said:

If you’re interested in  laser cutting, I’d be happy to discuss. 

I would also like to help, if there is anything I can do, but we would have to deal with shipping between Denmark and Canada, which may be a bother! But I would be happy to assist!

[Thukydides]

51 minutes ago, TJM said:

I would also like to help, if there is anything I can do, but we would have to deal with shipping between Denmark and Canada, which may be a bother! But I would be happy to assist!

I appreciate the offer, but yes I suspect the shipping would be pretty steep.

[Thukydides]

Log #6: Service History Part IV - James Richard Dacres

 

James Richard Dacres

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. PAD3166.

 

James Richard Dacres was born in February 1749 at Gibraltar, the eldest son of Richard Dacres. He joined the Navy 1762 as a Midshipman aboard the Active (28) and received his promotion to Lieutenant in 1769.

 

His first command came in 1776 when he was given the schooner Carlton (12) on the strategically important Lake Champlain. Under command of Captain Thomas Pringle, the British force engaged Benedict Arnold’s American flotilla near Valcour Island. During the battle, Dacres was knocked unconscious and command of the Carlton fell to a midshipman named Edward Pellew. In the ensuing battle the American fleet was destroyed with only a few escaping.

 

Defeat of the American Fleet off Crown Point in Lake Champlain

Library and Archives Canada, Acc. No. 1970-188-498 Coverdale Collection of Canadiana.

 

Despite being knocked unconscious during the battle, Dacres was singled out for praise for his role in the victory and was sent home with dispatches of the victory. There seems to have been some grumbling on the part of a number of officers who took part in the battle that the credit was unduly bestowed on Pringle and Dacres, but this grumbling does not seem to have impacted Dacres’ fortunes as he was given command of the sloop Sylph (18) shortly thereafter.

On the 13th of September, 1780, Dacres was appointed post Captain and given command of Perseus. Where Elphinstone’s log entries exuded energy, Dacres appears to have been a man of less words. Most entries are to the point giving limited detail.

 

After several months of repairs and fitting out, Perseus sailed from the Downs on the morning of the 30th of November 1780 in company with the schooner Racehorse (14) and the cutter Expedition (10). Sailing off Beachy, the three ships encountered a French privateer on the morning of December 1st. The French vessel, the Compté D’Aveaux a brig out of Boulogne, attempted to run, but during the engagement was holed below the waterline and began to sink. Around 40 French sailors were rescued, but the remainder perished along with an officer from the Racehorse who had gone over to take possession of the French ship.

 

On December 20th, war was declared with the Dutch and shortly thereafter, on the afternoon of the 25th, Perseus encountered and made a prize of the Dutch snow Vriendschap sailing south of Portsmouth. It seems that the Dutch ship in question had not received word that war had been declared as she was bound for London carrying goods belonging to British merchants.

 

Dacres' luck continued as on the 3rd of January he encountered a Dutch East Indiaman not far from where he had captured the snow. This proved to be a very valuable prize as she was loaded with silver and gold coins as well as other valuable goods.

 

Map of Significant Events for Dacres’ Command of Perseus

 

Map produced by me based on log entries from the Journal of HMS Perseus.

 

The rest of Dacres' time in command of Perseus appears to have been somewhat uneventful. Much of his time was employed escorting convoys and with the exception of a storm which nearly grounded the ship on the sand bars in the Downs, there are no significant events to note.

 

Perseus was paid off in March of 1782 and Dacres was given command of the Orpheus (32). Dacres went through a long period of unemployment after the peace of 1783, but in 1793 when war once again broke out with France, he resumed active service. He went on to have a successful career reaching the rank of Vice Admiral. He passed away on January 6, 1810 after falling off of a horse at the age of 60.

 

On the design side of things I have simplified the design a bit to show less of the lower deck and to make the lower frames a little thicker. You can see below the current state of affairs.

One thing I am wrestling through at the moment is the design of the various parts that make up the head. I am wondering if anyone has any contemporary documents or models you can think of which show the construction of the head broken into its various components.

 

Examples I have already found:

• 18th Century Shipbuilding by Blaise Olliver (1737)
• Bellona Model (1760) https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66464

• Egmont Model (1768) https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66105 EDIT: I just realized this is actually a model made in 1980 so not actually helpful even though it is a beautiful model.

Edited September 27 by Thukydides

[DeMaster76]

I'm following your build report of the HMS Perseus with interest, as I'm currently building a Sphinx class ship myself.

I have also created a build report in a German-speaking forum. Here is the link:

 

https://www.segelschiffsmodellbau.com/t9551f457-HMS-Sphynx-POB.html

 

Maybe we can discuss one or the other detail.

 

greetings from germany

 

Edited September 22 by DeMaster76

[Thukydides]

41 minutes ago, DeMaster76 said:

I'm currently building a Sphinx class ship myself.

Which period are you building her from? As launched or a later date. Many of the sphinx class saw significant changes over their lifetimes, many of which I have documented.

 

I am always happy to collaborate. My research document where I am compiling all my info is well over 200 pages at this point so if you have some specific questions regarding the ships I may very well have found something interesting.

 

If you are still in the design phase you might want to check out my first post where I include a link to a transcription of the contract for Perseus and unicorn. I had to make some adjustments from Alex's plans because his drawings did not always line up with it.

[Thukydides]

Log #7: Service History Part V - St. Alban Roy, George Palmer and John Gibson

 

St Alban Roy
St. Alban Roy was born sometime around 1731 and had a somewhat unremarkable career. He was promoted to post Captain on the 8th of July, 1782 having been given temporary command of the Cato (50) the previous month.

 

On October 21st, 1782 he was given command of Perseus, but no significant events are recorded during his command. Perseus was paid off in March of 1783 and Roy was given command of Perseus’ sister ship Unicorn in August of that year. This was his last recorded service and he died November 1796.

 

Tobacco Box Depicting Perseus Circa 1782

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. OBJ0260.

George Palmer
George Palmer was born sometime around 1755 and had a successful if relatively quiet career. The vast majority of his service was in command of Perseus during the peace.

He was posted captain on 18 January 1783 and briefly appointed to command the Surprise (28) before being reassigned to Perseus in July for service out of Liverpool and off Ireland. This command appears to have passed uneventfully with much of the time spent patrolling the coast. The most notable event that can be found in the logs is the loss of the ship’s cutter when a sudden storm hit while attempting to tow the Perseus.

 

Perseus was refitted at Plymouth in 1784, and after further service off Ireland she was paid off in February 1787. In December 1791 he recommissioned the Perseus 20, going out to Jamaica in March 1792, and at the commencement of hostilities with France in 1793 he was commanding her in the Leeward Islands from where he returned almost immediately to England. At some point around this time he likely captured the American ship Active. An appeal regarding the capture was filed in 1794, but no date is given for the capture. Perseus was paid off in December 1794.

 

Palmer saw further service on the Lion (64) and the Adventure (44) before being appointed rear Admiral on 23 April 1804. He retired having reached the rank of Admiral of the White and died on 8 September 1834 in Surrey.

John Gibson
There is little to no historical information available on John Gibson. He was born sometime around 1740 and was posted Captain on 23 December 1782 as commander of the Porcupine (24).

 

His time as commander of Perseus, from 8 May 1787 to 15 March 1791, appears to be uneventful with the only recorded events being refits. As with the time under the command of George Palmer, Perseus appears to have spent this time serving in the Irish Sea and the Channel. At some point in late 1789 or early 1790, Gibson was given or had commissioned a bowl with a hand painted image of Perseus under sail.

 

Bowl Depicting Perseus Circa 1790

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. AAA4434.

 

The bowl is notable as it contains a remarkable amount of detail. This represents one of my primary reference points for Perseus. Some notable details that can be seen include:

• The bulwarks on the quarterdeck are built up, but not on the forecastle.
• No armament can be made out on the forecastle (unless that tiny bump between the two people is a carronade), but the quarterdeck could potentially have three gunports (alternatively those marks could simply be smudges).
• No decorations are visible except for the figurehead. Not much detail can be made out of this, but it does appear that the left arm may be extended.
• There are no visible decorations on the quarter galleries or the stern, but it is impossible to definitively say if this represents their absence or just a lack of detail in the painting.
• The traditional lighter band above the wales is visible and appears to be larger than traditionally is visible on most depictions of similar sized RN warships of the period. In particular it is wider than the Marshall painting would suggest the band should be. The line runs above the gun ports as opposed to through them on the Marshall painting.
• The rigging is quite detailed and appears to show most of the principle standing lines as well as some of the running rigging.When compared to the rigging diagram for a 20 gun ship in Steel, there appears to be an extra stay above fore, main and mizzen topgallant stays.
• The ensign is depicted attached to an ensign staff and no boom is visible. The darker colour of the ensign compared to the sails suggests it was a red or blue ensign rather than a white one.
• One boat (possibly a pinnace due to its length) is visible on deck and the small bower can be seen apparently rigged to the cathead, but no sheet anchor is visible.

Gibson does not appear to have had another command after Perseus and died on 30 June 1824 in Somerset.

 

On the design side of things I had to redo a bunch of my work because I discovered a scaling issue between my different reference plans which resulted in the dimensions being slightly off. So I am still trying to adjust for this. On the research side I am still digging into the knee of the head arrangement and have managed to find at least 6 contemporary examples which likely represent English construction practices. I will do a full post on this subject once I have a firm idea in my head as to what I am going to go with for Perseus.
 

Edited September 27 by Thukydides

[brunnels]

I'm amazed at the amount of information you are obtaining.  That bowl is super cool.

Edited September 27 by brunnels

[DeMaster76]

On 9/22/2024 at 5:47 PM, Thukydides said:

Which period are you building her from? As launched or a later date. Many of the sphinx class saw significant changes over their lifetimes, many of which I have documented.

 

I am always happy to collaborate. My research document where I am compiling all my info is well over 200 pages at this point so if you have some specific questions regarding the ships I may very well have found something interesting.

 

If you are still in the design phase you might want to check out my first post where I include a link to a transcription of the contract for Perseus and unicorn. I had to make some adjustments from Alex's plans because his drawings did not always line up with it.

 

To be honest, I haven't given much thought to which construction stage I wanted to use for the Sphinx. A silly question: which ship in this class has the most information available? I also haven't decided on the exact choice of ship yet. I've already been able to admire Alexander and Dennis' Sphinx in live action and was wondering whether I should perhaps build a different ship of the same class. A third Sphinx is somehow a little bit boring.

 

I'm currently thinking about the best way to strengthen my frames. I would like to attach an auxiliary marking to each frame so that I know the exact course as precisely as possible beforehand. To do this, I will try to transfer the frame crack into 3D and then obtain this contour. However, as I have never done this before, I first have to familiarize myself with the methodology.

 

Edited October 6 by DeMaster76

[Thukydides]

5 hours ago, DeMaster76 said:

A silly question: which ship in this class has the most information available?

In terms of which has the most info, there is a surprising amount on all of them (except for narcissus). I would recommend taking a look at three decks (https://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_class&id=229) which lists the history of them all. It is a great starting point for research.

 

There are very few paintings of sphinx class ships so not much in the way of visual representation other than the bowl I mentioned above. There is one painting of Camilla, but very late in her career. There is one other painting claimed to be of camilla, but I am pretty sure it is not her. There is one painting by Serres which shows a number of English ships (two of which are Camilla and Galatea), but it is impossible to know which ones are them.

 

In terms of plans full sets of plans are available for them all, but Sphinx, Camilla, Vestal and Daphne all have plans which include their figurehead and decorations so maybe that makes them a better choice.

[druxey]

Nice information, Thukydides!

[Thukydides]

Log #8: Service History Part VI - Conversion to an Unrated Bomb Ship

Perseus’ time as a 6th Rate Post ship came to an end when she was converted to an unrated bomb vessel. The plans for her conversion were drawn up sometime in 1797 and in May of 1798 she was commissioned as a 10 gun bomb ship under Commander James Oswald.

 

The plan for her convesion is interesting as it shows a number of changes to her layout including an extra bulkhead under the quarterdeck and changes to the positioning of the ladderways. The former likely occured early on in her career as I have a letter from George Keith Elphinstone to the dockyard requesting the alteration, but in the case of the ladderways it is impossible to know for sure if they represented changes made at the time of conversion or if they simply were documenting changes previously made.

 

The sectional plan confirms many of the timber dimensions in the contract indicating that there were limited changes in this regard to the ship over her lifetime.

 

She served under Oswald until August 1799 when he was succeeded by Lieutenant Henry Compton who was subsequently promoted to commander. Perseus served in the Mediterranean for this period participating in the blockade of Malta. However, by this point Perseus was showing her age and sustained so much damage in a gale that she could not be repaired on station. Compton was ordered by Lord Keith (the same Lord Keith who was her first captain) to return to England with a convoy. The poor state of the Perseus resulted in her being ordered to Woolwich for repairs.

 

In March 1803, Commander John Melhuish took command of Perseus. The most notable action of Melhish’s command was the Bombardment of Dieppe in September 1803. In company with HMS Immortalite(36) and HMS Explosion, another bomb vessel, Perseus bombarded the Dieppe batteries and seventeen vessels, most of which were in the process of being constructed in the port. They then proceeded to St. Valery-en-Caux and bombarded ships under construction there. However, as historian William Clowes notes, “It is doubtful whether very much damage was done.” 

 

In May 1804, Commander Thomas Searl was given command of Perseus. There are no significant events recorded for his time in command and Perseus was broken up in September of 1805 bringing to an end an almost 30 year career.

 

On the design side of things I am slowly working on finalizing the bulkhead structure. I realized during my redesign that I actually had room to increase to a larger thickness of plywood for the bulkheads and so have done so to give greater strength to the design. You can see a picture of the current state of affairs below.

Thanks to everyone who has stopped by to take a look and for the encouragement.

Edited October 7 by Thukydides

[Thukydides]

Log #9: Researching the Knee of the Head Part I

My design work is getting to the point where I need to start making some decisions regarding how I am going to model the ship. One of the more consequential of these things that need to be decided on is the knee of the head. I am still doing a bunch of reading, but I thought I would share some of what I have found in case anyone has any ideas of other places to look.

 

My goal with this model has been to trace everything back to primary sources wherever possible. I found myself dissatisfied by the information I found in the many modern sources, mostly because they so rarely pointed to any primary documents. This is not to say these works are wrong and I don’t want anyone to take this a a criticism of them. Shipbuilding practices varied considerably from yard to yard. Blaise Ollivier, in his 1737 remarks on english shipbuilding practices (otherwise known as his spying expedition) notes that Depford, Woolwich and Chatham all used different building methods. This means that historical examples of the knee of the head should be viewed not as proscriptive, but as examples. One could probably make a case for just about any reasonable arrangement. That being said, my desire is to stay as close to documented historical practice as I can so that will guide my design decisions.

 

Information on Perseus’ Construction

There is limited detail in the contract regarding the construction of the knee of the head for Perseus. The stem is clearly laid out on the draft and the contract specifies that it should be in two pieces with a 3 ½ foot scarf. However, apart from the overall shape of the knee of the head laid out in the draft, the only details given are directions for the gripe to be covered in lead on the leading edge up to the waterline and for the end of the head to extend 8 ft 5 in from the stem.

 

Draught of Camilla, National Maritime Museum

Four draughts for Perseus’ sister ships, Sphinx, Camilla, Daphne and Vestal showing the carvings and decorations also show the location of the gammoning hole. It is reasonable to assume that the location would be similar on Perseus. However there is no info provided for any of the Sphinx class regarding the specific makeup of the knee of the head. 

 

Knee of the Head Examples 1737-1760

Contemporary depictions of the knee of the head are few and far between. Much of this relates to the lack of publications from the period on shipbuilding practices. Modern secondary sources when depicting the knee of the head tend to show similar patterns typified by the below example from Goodwin. However, contemporary records are far more varied and it is unclear what the original source for this arrangement is.

 

The Knee of the Head, 18th Century, Goodwin, The Construction and Fitting, Redrawn

Ollivier’s 1737 observations on English shipbuilding practices includes one diagram of the knee of the head as part of his observations of the Deptford dockyard. He describes how English shipwrights made a mould of the various parts (lacing, face piece, etc…) and then filled these moulds with what timbers all with a common curve. These timbers were fastened together with hooked scarphs. Ollivier was clearly impressed by this method of construction which he said was “more simple, no less solid, and beyond compare less costly than that which we employ.” Ollivier also notes the use of an iron dovetail plate used to fasten the gripe to the stem. This contrasts with later examples which show a horseshoe plate.

 

Knee of the Head for a Ship of 80 Guns, 1737 Ollivier, 18th Century Shipbuilding, redrawn

The next example shows up sometime after 1745 in a sectional drawing held by Sjöhistoriska Museet. The drawing is reproduced by Lavery in his book Ship of the Line and shows a 60 gun ship built according to the 1745 establishment. The knee of the head is made up of a large number of roughly parallel strakes though, unlike the Olliver example, they are not scarfed into one another.

 

The drawing features a much longer cutwater than generally is depicted on modern reproductions, and like the Ollivier example, the lacing buts against the stem instead of running down to the gripe. Curiously, it appears that it has two false keels, though as the picture is at low resolution it is hard to tell for sure.

 

Knee of the Head for a Ship of 60 Guns, 1745 Establishment, Sjöhistoriska Museet, redrawn

This practice appears to have continued on into 1760 as can be seen on a model of Bellona (74). The Bellona model is unique in that it is the only contemporary model I have been able to identify which shows the components of the knee of the head.

 

Though the pieces that make up the knee of the head are larger than both Ollivier’s diagram and the example reproduced in Lavery, they do follow the principle of the common curve. There are no scarfs locking the pieces together and this could indicate either they were not used by this particular shipwright or possibly that the model maker simply neglected to include those details. One particular detail on the model which stands out is the long cutwater which extends from the main piece all the way to the gripe. This is even longer than the cutwater on the Lavery example and contrasts with the relatively short cutwater that can be seen on many modern examples. There is no plate fastening the gripe to the stem shown on the model.

 

Model of HMS Bellona, Circa 1760, National Maritime Museum

I am still working on documenting and researching early 1800s examples though it is questionable how applicable they are to Perseus given that around 1800 there was a number of changes to how the knee of the head was constructed. They and also a french example from around the time of Perseus’ construction will be discussed in Part II.

 

If anyone knows of any other examples, particularly any dating to the late 1700s I would love to hear about them.

Edited October 11 by Thukydides

[Gregory]

Good research.  It may be one of those things that ship builders took for granted and just didn't document all that well..

 

This is the way Hahn drew the stem on Rattlesnake , though it doesn't show this much detail on the NMM drawings.

I have seen it modeled a time or two in this manner, but there is something very wrong here.  Any guesses?

Edited October 11 by Gregory

[Thukydides]

46 minutes ago, Gregory said:

but there is something very wrong here.  Any guesses

Not sure what specifically you are referring to, but the gripe does look a bit odd. It is a strange shape, there is no scarph joining it to the knee of the head and the joint is in the same location as the stem joint when they really should be shifted.

 

Also I would imagine that in reality the knee of the head would have been made of at least a few different pieces. That being said most contemporary models just used one piece as they didn’t bother to show this detail. In many cases the joints would be covered up by the cheeks.

 

46 minutes ago, Gregory said:

Good research.  It may be one of those things that ship builders took for granted and just didn't document all that well

Thanks, that is totally the reason. One of the issues was most shipwrights were illiterate and even if they could write, describing this would be revealing trade secrets and might put you out of a job.

Edited October 12 by Thukydides

[Gregory]

43 minutes ago, Thukydides said:

Not sure what specifically you are referring to,

The main problem I see is that  the piece that holds the gammoning slot probably would not have provided the kind of support/strength required for that function.

But as you alluded to, for modeling purposes, it wouldn't be visible with all the head gear in place. 

 

Here is the the actual NMM drawing.

Since this was not a construction drawing, any number of details could be missing.

[druxey]

If you are referring to the standard, it usually had the gammoning slot on its underside. It was firmly bolted through the knee of the head and was certainly strong enough to resist upward forces from the gammoning and bowsprit. Remember that there were also bobstays to reduce this load.

 

The standard is rarely shown in the 'as built' sheer plan.

[Thukydides]

Log #10: Depictions of Perseus

My work on documenting my research on the knee of the head and finalizing my design has taken longer than I thought so in the meantime I thought I would share some more information on potentially relevant contemporary depictions of Perseus and her sister ships. I have already mentioned the bowl and the tobacco box, so today we will cover all of the other depictions I have found. I do cover more possible depictions in my document which I will release at some point when it is ready, but for this log I will restrict myself to the depictions I actually believe show Sphinx class ships.

 

Joseph Marshall, HMS Sphinx Stern View

Science Museum Group. HMS Sphinx. 1864-4/2.
 

Date Made: Circa 1759-1837

 

Joseph Marshall was a marine painter active from 1755-1779. He is best known for a commission he did for George III depicting ships of each class in the Royal Navy. In 1773 Joseph Marshall was commissioned by Lord Sandwich, First Lord of the Admiralty, for George III to produce a number of perspective paintings of Royal Navy ships. The perspectives themselves were produced by draughtsmen Joseph Williams and John Binmer working from the original plans while George Marshall was responsible for painting all the pictures.
 

The lead ship of the Sphinx class was one of the ships captured in these paintings. The stern view was drafted by Joseph Williams and the bow view by John Binmer. Both paintings show a considerable amount of detail of the carvings which match those depicted on the plans and also painted decorations which were not in the plans

There is no indication as to where Joseph Marshall might have gotten the inspiration for these painted decorative elements. The fact that the paintings were reproduced from the plans suggests that Marshall did not have access to a model of Sphinx as a source reference. The paintings were completed sometime in 1775, around the time that Sphinx was launched, so it is possible that Marshall viewed the ship itself, but it seems more likely that the decorative elements represent his own artistic inspiration.
 

Dominic Serres, Destruction of the American Fleet at Penobscot Bay

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. BHC0425.

Date Made: Late 18th century

Domnic Serres was born in France in the early 18th century. In 1773 he received a royal commission to depict a visit of George III to inspect the fleet and was later appointed to be Marine Painter to George III. Serres was a prolific painter and founding member of the Royal Academy. He died in 1793.

 

Both the Galatea and Camilla were present in this engagement and are presumably among the British ships shown from the middle and to the right of the painting. There are not many details visible and all of the ships appear to have black lower transoms. In fact they almost appear as if they were largely copies of one another.

 

During the Seven Years War Serres painted scenes based on sketches made by Richard Short, a purser in the Navy. However, there is no indication as to whether or not this painting was based on an eyewitness sketch. Given the uncertainty around how accurate of a depiction it is and also the fact that it is impossible to know which of the ships might be the Galatea or Camilla this painting should probably not be relied upon other than as potentially a general depiction of warships of the period.

 

Drawing of Camilla

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. PAH9227.

 

Date Made: Circa 1825

H.M.S. Camilla in a sea passage between rocky coasts, unknown artist. The forecastle appears to have built up bulwarks, but this does not appear to be also true of the quarterdeck. If this does indeed depict Camilla, it is clearly a drawing of her late in her career as she features the Nelson chequer.
 

If anyone knows of any other potential depictions of Sphinx class ships I would love to hear about them. I am already aware of two more which I am pretty sure do not depict them:

• Thomas Luny, HMS Perseus in Plymouth Sound - likely depicts the later Laurel class HMS Perseus
• John Thomas Serres, H.M.S. Camilla, 20 Guns - the painting is clearly not of HMS Camilla (wrong number of ports, not quarter galleries) even though the frame labels it as such.

[Thukydides]

Log #11: Researching the Knee of the Head Part II

I am finally starting to lock down the design for the structure of the model and an important part of that is the knee of the head. As promised here is the second part in which I cover the remaining historical examples I was able to find as well as my preliminary plan for what I will do with Perseus.

 

We left last time with the example of the Bellona model and after the it, there are no more significant depictions of English knees of the head until the early 1800s. However, an interesting example of French construction from the late 18th century can be found in the Encyclopedie Methodique: Marine by Vial du Clairbois.

Sectional Profile of a French Frigate, Circa 1783

Vial Du Clairbois, Encyclopédie méthodique, Plate 82, archive.org.

 

The illustration shows the inboard profile of an unknown French frigate. The head is composed of many timbers, of a common curve, scarfed into one another. Clairbois’ commentary notes that this is a significantly more economical way of constructing the head and he further notes that the method is more like English or foreign practice as opposed to French. The upper part of the knee of the head bears a striking resemblance to the Ollivier drawing and it is notable that this example differs considerably from two other examples of French knees of the head depicted in the volume.

 

Steel’s 1812 book on naval architecture includes no detailed diagrams showing the knee of the head, but does briefly describe the process by which it was constructed:

Quote

KNEE OF THE HEAD. The Knee'of the Head has its several pieces sawed to their various shapes given on the mould, and the tapering sideways where they cross the battens. The main piece should make the lower part of the knee, and run up in front to take the bob stay holes. Another piece must be provided to make the lacing, and a third to fay against the stem, and run up high enough for a hole to be cut in it to receive the main-stay collar. The other pieces between may then be provided, as most convenient, marking on the mould the shape of each piece as provided, allowing to each sufficient wood for tabling and faying.

 

Though this does not assist in describing exactly how the head would have looked, it does reinforce the idea that shipwrights tended to have broad latitude in how they constructed the head and the specific makeup likely depended on the available timbers. The description of the methodology is also reminiscent of Ollivier’s description of how English shipwrights he observed constructed the head.

 

At some point in the early 1800s the design of the knee of the head appears to have begun to change. The new designs featured a timber called the stem piece which runs parallel to the stem all the way to the top of the knee of the head replacing the standard. The lacing then buts against this piece with the chock pieces made up of a number of wedges filling in the remaining space. These changes can be seen in a sectional plan of HMS Nelson, a 1st rate launched in 1814 showing the arrangement for the knee of the head.

Sectional Plan of HMS Nelson 1814

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. PAH9223.

 

Once again we can also see that each of these components of the head was made up of many different pieces scarfed together. The figurehead is also much smaller in keeping with 19th century practice depicting the figure from the waste up.

 

This shift in practice for the construction of the head is also evident in John Fincham’s 1821 book on the practice of shipbuilding. In it, there is an illustration which, similar to the Nelson 1814 example, shows a stem piece running from alongside the stem. In this example, the stem piece continues down to lock into the gripe. The diagram also shows the separation of the gripe into two pieces which Fincham explains is to allow this piece to separate in the event that the ship is grounded to avoid the entire gripe being carried away along with the false keel. Fincham’s diagram also includes a horseshoe plate to secure the gripe to the stem.

The Structure of the Head, Circa 1821

Fincham, Outline of Shipbuilding, Plate 4; Lavery, Nelson’s Navy, 63;  redrawn.

 

Like Steel, Fincham’s description of the construction of the knee of the head makes clear that shipwrights had broad latitude in how it was constructed.

Quote

Lacing Piece has its upper part forming the lacing for the back of the figure, and in general extends down to form an abutment into the stem piece, and to give the form to some distance up, of the fore part of the knee: the Bobstay Piece has an abutment in the main piece and extends up to the underside of the figure, and has its fore edge to the form of the fore part of the knee. The other pieces that make up the breadth and form of the knee are of a size and form most convenient.

 

Having considered the available contemporary examples of the construction of the knee of the head we are left with more questions than answers. Despite this there are probably a number of key conclusions we can make about English construction of the knee of the head:

1. English construction practices for the knee of the head likely varied from shipyard to shipyard and based on the available timber.
2. Individual parts such as the lacing, chock etc.. were likely made of multiple pieces of wood running parallel to each other or following a common curve.
3. The individual pieces that make up the head were at times scarphed together. This may have been the standard practice, but there is insufficient evidence to definitively make this assertion.

The following is a potential arrangement of the knee of the head consistent with the historical examples reviewed. It should be noted that this is by no means the only reasonable way one could speculate Perseus’ head was constructed, but is meant to illustrate one possible arrangement. It incorporates the shape from the draught, the available dimensions in the contract and broadly follows the Bellona model. I am a little apprehensive about if I will be able to pull it off. Getting tight joints with those scarphs may be hard. However, if I find I can't do it, I may pivot to simply copying the Bellona arrangement.

[Arthur Goulart]

There is a very notorious reference that you might have forgotten about:

Grant it, she was restored a couple of times, but Victory is some 15 years older than Perseus and, still, show no scarphs.

Edited November 6 by Arthur Goulart

[Thukydides]

2 hours ago, Arthur Goulart said:

There is a very notorious reference that you might have forgotten about:

Oh I didn't forget about her 😀. I just didn't bother to mention it as she is not really a contemporary example in my view. The problem is Victory has been rebuilt so many times over the years that much of her current appearance is not really reflective of what she originally looked like. @Morgan I believe is working on a book which will discuss some of the many changes to victory so maybe he might have more to say.

 

However, my understanding is that the head was rebuilt at the very least on the early 1900s (there are some diagrams in Bugler's book about the restoration). However to my knowledge there is no reason to believe that even what was done then reflects her original appearance.

 

I did consider adding a discussion on victory to the writeup, but though I am reasonably confident that the modern victory is not a reliable source for how the original head was constructed, I didn't feel I had enough useful things to say and so decided not to mention her at all.

 

As always I do appreciate that you took the time to engage and suggest things I may not have thought of so please don't take this as me dismissing your suggestion. If you have come across any evidence to suggest that the modern head of victory does reflect 18th century practice I would be happy to be shown to be wrong 😀.

[Gregory]

Since someone brought it up:

 

Here is what Longridge drew in " The Anatomy of Nelson's Ships "..   Note the 'Note'..

 

P.S.

I believe the drawing is by George F. Campbell

Edited November 7 by Gregory

[Thukydides]

Log #12: First Draft of the Research Document

Thank you to everyone who has stopped by even though construction on the model hasn't started yet :).

 

I have finalized the design and the first batch of materials have been ordered. Only issue is Canada Post decided to go on strike so it may be a while before I get the stuff. So in the meantime work has continued on designing things such as the carriages for the guns (see below for the current state of affairs on these) and ongoing research into aspects such as the figurehead and other details of Perseus' appearance.

As I have hinted a number of times, in the background I have been working on a research document to keep track of my thoughts. There are two parts of this document which I suspect will be of most use to the community as a whole and Sphinx class builders in particular:

1. Chapter 1, in which I review all of the plans and art available for the Sphinx class ships in detail.
2. The appendices, which contain numerous relevant primary source documents I have compiled and transcribed.

As the full document will likely not be completed until shortly before I complete the model I have decided to release it in parts. So attached to this post are chapters 1 and 2 along with the current version of the Appendices and Bibliography. For those who have been following along with my log, much of it may be familiar as I frequently copy sections from the document for my log posts. However, the document contains significantly more detail as well as extensive documentation of the sources used to justify the assertions I have made. If you have any questions, disagreements or find any typos then please feel free to get in contact with me. I would love to hear from you.

 

Please note the following:

1. This is very much a draft (I have only made one proofing pass through it) and so there may very well be errors. I will continue to be editing it in the background and at some point I will post revisions along with future chapters as they are completed. Because this is a draft, I have not yet gone through and adjusted the location of the figures to make sure they are spaced properly. As such I am aware that there are occasionally blank sections, but am not going to address these issues until I am much closer to the final version.
2. This document is being released to benefit the modelling community so please feel free to use it to assist with your personal research and modelling endeavors. However, this represents a significant amount of work (I have been working on this for over a year at this point) so if you do use my material please make sure you credit the original author (either me or the other references as cited in the document).

HM 20-Gun Ship Perseus Chapters 1-2 & Appendixes DRAFT.pdf

Edited November 22 by Thukydides

[Glen McGuire]

Very impressive research document, Thukydides!

[brunnels]

Your research is incredible, fantastic work.

[jpalmer1970]

Great work Daniel. This is a very impressive document constructed from an interesting and wide range of sources!

[Alan Cabrera]

On 9/15/2024 at 3:33 PM, Thukydides said:

Log #6: Service History Part IV - James Richard Dacres

 

James Richard Dacres

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. PAD3166.

That portrait makes my daughter want to bring out her tweezers and go to work…

[druxey]

Well, Daniel, for a draft it is very good and thorough. A lot of digging and work has gone into that. Well done!

 

The Serres painting is not of a Swan class vessel: it appears to be flush decked.

[Thukydides]

3 hours ago, Alan Cabrera said:

That portrait makes my daughter want to bring out her tweezers and go to work…

Yes Dacres was not the most handsome of men. The unibrow is quite impressive though

 

26 minutes ago, druxey said:

The Serres painting is not of a Swan class vessel: it appears to be flush decked.

I had not meant to imply that it was a Swan class vessel, I was just using them as an example. On reflection I have edited my internal version to remove the reference to the Swan class as it didn’t really add anything to the discussion in any case. Thanks for the suggestion.

[Thukydides]

As we are nearing Christmas I thought I would give a final update before the new year. This will be a minor update as I don’t have a lot to show at the moment with Canada Post continuing to be on strike . That being said in the background I have continued to pick away at the research side of things.

 

As can be seen in my previous post I have been attempting to draw up gun carriages. However, since that post my work has been complicated by the number of sometimes conflicting contemporary examples I have found. I am attempting to carefully work through them all to come to some conclusions.

 

One thing I did discover (though it is not really surprising) is a primary source explicitly stating that the trucks and sometimes the brackets were modified in size to accommodate the differing heights of the ports on ships. This at least takes away the pressure of figuring out the exact dimensions of my carriages in the short term as I can safely build the ports as per the plans and then modify the heights of the carriages slightly if necessary.

 

However, I have run into one oddity that I am wondering if anyone has any insight on. It is the question of the ends / steps of the brackets. Most contemporary examples I have found depict them as below with the steps / ends perpendicular to the centreline of the carriage (I say most as there are a few where it is unclear and though I have not run across an example which definitively does not folllow this convention, I have be no means looked at every available example out there):

However, this seems a much more complicated way to construct them vs simply making the ends / steps perpendicular to the brackets themselves. Caruana’s redrawing of carriages seems to treat these ends/steps as perpendicular to the brackets themselves and it seemed odd to me that he would have done that for no reason.

 

Does anyone have any insight into if this was just a drawing convention of the time or actual practice?

 

[AON]

I thought they weren't.

Also, I believe the fore and aft trucks (wheels) should not be inclined. The fore trucks are inboard.