Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Wagram

Members2
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    252

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Wagram

    French ship Redoutable (1791)

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    On 10/23/2019 at 4:56 AM, Wagram said:

    In the French navy, simple busts were not used as figureheads for ships-of-the line until after the Napoleonic era. So yes, a Restauration era piece at the earliest. As there existed no ship-of-the-line named "Duquesne" under the Restauration, the bust probably was just an isolated product of workmanship, perhaps a study, perhaps intended for a projected but never realized "Duquesne". Under the Empire, there was a training vessel rebaptized "Duquesne" in 1811, the former Russian ship-of-the-line "Moskva" (74, 1799, Arkhangelsk), sold to France in 1809 at Toulon. According to a watercolour by André (or Andrea) Moretti, dated 1812, her figurehead was a full figure (representing either a human or an eagle, I'm not sure), and not a bust.

    The Moretti watercolour of "Duquesne", ex- "Moskva", is now online.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_ship_Moskva_(1799)

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Duquesne_by_Andre_Moretti_1812.jpg

    • Like 1

    La taverne du corsaire

    in Naval Action (en français)

    Posted

    On 11/29/2019 at 1:11 PM, LeBoiteux said:

    Quelqu'un connait-il un ouvrage fiable sur les drapeaux français de l'Ancien régime (Moyen-âge et surtout Temps modernes (16e s. - 18e s.)) ?

    NB : si je dis 'drapeaux' @Surcouf, c'est bien parce que je pense à l'armée de 'terre' (infanterie, artillerie, cavalerie) et accessoirement à la Marine.

    (un livre, pas un site internet qui a vaguement copié-collé les info d'autres sites.)

    A recommander

    https://www.amazon.fr/Drapeaux-étendards-roi-Pierre-Charrié/dp/2863772384

     

    • Like 1

    Ornaments of the French ship-of-the-line "L'Hercule" (1797/8)

    in Ships of the line

    Posted

    On 11/19/2019 at 2:56 PM, LeBoiteux said:

    right-click on the pic in imgur, open in a new 'onglet', copy the link and paste it here and you get that 

    Sorry, but obviously I'm just too stupid to understand what you mean. I tried again with another picture but I just don't succeed at posting the picture directly. What do you mean by "right-click"? When I post the picture on imgur I get an url, and wherever I paste this url I'll always get the whole imgur page, never the picture alone...

    Need help finding the book with Dutch ships!

    in Shipyard

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    11 hours ago, Thonys said:

    it bears the flag of the batavian republic era

    Honestly, I'm not convinced. The flags of the navy of the Batavian Republic looked quite different: They show a seated "Liberty" who - together with the "Batavian Lion"  - holds a staff crowned by a (sailor's) top hat. The field of the pennant (Wimpel) is all red.

    Flags_of_the_navy_of_the_Batavian_Republ

    Regarding the style of the ornaments of the yacht shown above, it is very much like c.1700 indeed. The flag appears to show a pair of crossed anchors topped by what looks like a crown (?), all surrounded by a floral pattern. The hoist end of the larger pennant shows the same crowned crossed anchors, in my opinion.

     

    Ornaments of the French ship-of-the-line "L'Hercule" (1797/8)

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    Recently, I stumbled over a contemporary drawing of the designed ornaments for this French ship-of-the-line ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hercule_(1797) ), captured by the British in 1798 (https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/80672.html).

    "Dessein de la Sculpture du Vaisseau L'hercule de 74 canons en construction dans le port de la ville de Lorient" (from an old exhibition catalogue: Ekhart Berckenhagen, Schiffe. Häfen. Kontinente. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Seefahrt, Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 1983, p.363):

    The catalogue says the drawing is by Jean-Baptiste Bara, born 1763, maître-sculpteur at Lorient. It is said to be dated 1792, but the ship was ordered in 1793 only and laid down in 1794, so I don't know whether all the data is correct.

    Sorry, no pictures as there is no free space left for attachments and I don't know how to get free space (tried but didn't work).

    • Like 2

    Swedish Ships of the Line by af Chapman

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    I suspect that the British didn't care because "Implacable" was not really a British ship, and the French may have not wanted her back as she was no longer a truly French ship. The preservation and restoration of "Implacable" (maybe, I'd rather say "former and future Duguay-Trouin" 😉) surely would have been a huge task for the French - in terms of expenses, in the first place - but, in my opinion, in the end it would have been a more than satisfying enterprise. As mentioned, if the ship had been submerged in order to preserve her it should have been possible to salvage her at a more convenient time. But preservation would only have made sense, in my opinion, if she had been restored as the French Duguay-Trouin. At any rate, all British modifications would have had to be stripped off (so, the British could have kept the stern and figurehead of "Implacable" for exhibition at the NMM 🙂).

    In my opinion, there would have been two options.

    The less expensive option probably would have been to just preserve what was left of the original ship, basically the hull, etc. in a museum, with an abundant documentation on the original ship, etc. Essentially, the same solution as found for "Wasa" or "Mary Rose".

    The costlier (in financial terms), more demanding (in terms of research and craftsmanship), more spectacular but also riskier (in terms of meeting requirements regarding historical accuracy /authenticity) option would have been to choose the way of restauration. Basically, what was done with "Victory" or "Constitution", which - of course - presupposes the availability of reliable sources.

    Well, she was a Sané designed Téméraire class ship of which there are enough extant plans. A drawing of the stern and quarter gallery ornaments has also survived. Boudriot was wrong when he attributed these ornaments to the "Duguay-Trouin" built at Brest in 1787/88 and burnt at Toulon in 1793. The drawing is not signed "Lubet", as Boudriot claimed. It is clearly signed "Rolland" (Pierre), ship builder at Rochefort, and "Delizy", maître-sculpteur at Rochefort from 1797. So these ornaments are clearly those of our "Duguay-Trouin", built at Rochefort from 1794-1800, and captured in 1805. Unfortunately, no drawing of the figurehead survives but as remarked elsewhere, there is a contemporary document describing the figurehead in some detail. From this and surviving contemporary models of figureheads in French naval museums it should have been possible to reconstruct the ornaments of the ship reasonably well. But then ... the cannons, the masts, the rigging, etc., everything would have had to be reconstructed anew ...

    Swedish Ships of the Line by af Chapman

    in Ships of the line

    Posted

    15 minutes ago, Archdouche said:

    That is probably one of the best failures we have achieved considering what an awesome museum it all became

    Absolutely agree. Surely, the French very much regret that the "Implacable", ex-Duguay-Trouin, was destroyed. She would have been another great museum. The alleged reason for the destruction is known - no money left to preserve her. However, I wonder why they had to blow her up. No prudence here, in my opinion, and no goodwill. Would it not have been possible to just ballast her and leave her under water at some secure spot in order to have the option to recover her at a later time? Water may preserve wooden hulls quite well, as the example of Wasa demonstrates...

    Swedish Ships of the Line by af Chapman

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    2 hours ago, Archdouche said:

    And hopefully and likely have better sailing qualities than the brick with sails that is called Santisima Trinidad😉

    Are you talking about the original Santísima Trinidad - which was a 120-gun three-decker ...

    Santissima_Trinidad_mg_0582.jpg

    The plan is dated to 1777, according to Acerra and Meyer, BTW, not to 1836, as the Wiki "source" claims ...

    ... or about the converted ill-fated four-decker which participated in the battle of Trafalgar?

    Anyway, Santísima Trinidad was a real "brick", as you call her, while "Kronan" remained just a chimaera ... 😉

    Swedish Ships of the Line by af Chapman

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    45 minutes ago, Archdouche said:

    Indeed it would. Chapman was a damn capable naval designer and the designs that were completed were up to expectations. If he could pull off a ship of that size we will never know, but I believe that he made the adoptions and design details needed for it to be possible. After all, he relied on mathematics for all his designs, and math does not usually fail in giving a pretty good result. It would truly be an awesome ship. And hopefully and likely have better sailing qualities than the brick with sails that is called Santisima Trinidad😉

    Sorry, maybe I'm a bit stupid, but wasn't it for topographical reasons that Sweden never built three-deckers? I mean, the Dutch never did it because Dutch waters were just too shallow, as far as I know ...

    La taverne du corsaire

    in Naval Action (en français)

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    6 hours ago, LeBoiteux said:

    Quelqu'un connait-il l'histoire de ces trois plans british de l'Unité (?) qui ont pas mal de différences, avant/après modif (?) ?

    Mai 1796 : capeture

    Juillet 1796 (?) : figure de proue intéressante...

    j6091.jpg

    Oct. 1796 (?) :

    j6090.jpg

     1798 (?) :

    j5948.jpg

    C'est sans doute un épisode du forum que j'ai raté 🙂

    Je pense qu'il s'agit de deux navires, tous les deux baptisés "L'Unité", tous les deux capturés en 1796.

    Je dirais que les deux premiers plans se rapportent à la frégate de 12 "L'Unité", 32 canons, lancée à Rochefort en 1787 sous le nom "La Gracieuse". Devient "L'Unité" en 1793. Capturée par HMS Révolutionnaire le 13 avril 1796. Elle reste "L'Unité" (HMS Unité) dans la Royal Navy. Le premier plan semble montrer le navire "as taken", le deuxième dit "as fitted". Les plans au National Maritime Museum sont numérotés de 6247 à 6250. Je dirais que ce sont les plans n°. 6247 et 6248?

    Le troisième plan montre la corvette de 8 "L'Unité", 32 canons, lancée au Havre en 1794. Devient "La Variante" en 1795, mais garde son ancien nom "L'Unité". Capturée par HMS Inconstant le 20 avril 1796 et devenue HMS Surprize (Surprise selon le plan) dans la Royal Navy (designée sous 9 pounder frigate).

    • Like 2

    French ship Redoutable (1791)

    in Ships of the line

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    3 hours ago, LeBoiteux said:

    J'aimerais bien en trouver/voir une représentation un peu plus visible/détaillée.

    D'après ce que je comprends de ton compte-rendu, rien n'empêche que L'Etats de Bourgogne ait arboré, comme figure de proue :

    • un blason 'royaliste' jusqu'en 92/93
    • transformé alors dans sa version républicaine jusqu'à la bataille du 1 juin 1794
    • puis remplacé, au cours de l'année, par une figure allégorique révolutionnaire. Les combats ont pu l'abîmer. Et les figures allégoriques étaient à la mode.
    • Puis en 1795, changement de nom (Le Peuple puis L'Océan) et nouvelle figure de proue (à moins que ce ne soit la même) : le titan Océan (?).

    Non ?

     

    • un blason 'royaliste' jusqu'en 92/93 - Not until 1793 but until the second half of 1792. As long as the constitutional monarchy lasted there was no reason to remove the royal escutcheon. But then it would undoubtedly have been removed quickly, for political reasons.
    • transformé alors dans sa version républicaine jusqu'à la bataille du 1 juin 1794 - Changed after the abolition of the monarchy, just by removing the crown and lilies and replacing them by a helmet and tricolour escutcheon. A relatively simple procedure, I'd say. So far, I could not find any indication that this design was replaced by a completely new figurehead after the battle of 1st June 1794.
    • puis remplacé, au cours de l'année, par une figure allégorique révolutionnaire. Les combats ont pu l'abîmer. Et les figures allégoriques étaient à la mode. - I do not know exactly what you mean. As mentioned, I know nothing of a change of the figurehead at that time. I know nothing of a demolition or loss of the figurehead in battle. De Loutherbourg's sketch which seems to show a warrior figurehead  apparently was a preliminary study for the painting. He seems to have noted that it was incorrect and changed it for the figurehead already described above (however, one detail may still be erroneous. According to the catalogue Maquettes de la Marine Impériale. Collection du Musée de la Marine à Trianon, p. 89., a Phrygian cap replaced the Royal arms - I understand that the Phyrgian cap replaced the crown which topped the escutcheon. So, instead of a helmet a Phrygian cap may have topped the escutcheon, as with the Commerce de Marseille).
    • Puis en 1795, changement de nom (Le Peuple puis L'Océan) et nouvelle figure de proue (à moins que ce ne soit la même) : le titan Océan (?). - According to Demerliac there was a first refit of the ship in 1797 but according to Luc-Marie Bayle / Jacques Mordal, La Marine en bois, p.109, Océan just remained inactive from 1797 to 1799, and the first important refit took place in 1804/05 (same statement in the catalogue Maquettes de la Marine Impériale. Collection du Musée de la Marine à Trianon, p. 86). So the figurehead could have been replaced only then or, at the earliest, in 1797. Definitely, there would have been no need to replace the helmet and tricolour escutcheon design for political reasons in 1795 as France remained a Republic after 1795 and the Tricolour was still its national flag. It would have suited a Peuple or an Océan equally well as it had suited La Montagne before. Anyway, in 1795,  Le Peuple was at sea when it was decided to rebaptise it Océan, and it returned to Brest only at the beginning of 1797, for which reason it is unlikely that any kind of new figurehead could have been mounted before that date. The Trianon model which has a Neptune (Maquettes ..., p.89) as a figurehead was originally made c. 1787-1790 but then it would have displayed the Royal arms as a figurehead. Its present state is due to a substantial reworking of the model in 1810/11, on which occasion its appearance was brought into line with the 1806/07 specifications for this type of ship. So, what we see today is the ship as it looked like after the 1804/05 refit, including the figurehead. Again, I've not seen any definite evidence so far that the Neptune-figurehead had already been mounted before this 1804/05 refit but it's possible, of course.

    'Le Vengeur' French Indiaman/3rd Rate 1756

    in Trading vessels

    Posted · Edited by Wagram

    A most detailed account on the ship, referring also to the dimensions not only of the hull but also of the masts and yards, etc., can be found in the above mentioned book by Patrick Villiers (La Marine de Louis XVI, I. de Choiseul à Sartine), pp. 362-370. It includes a drawing of the ship ornaments (stern and quarter galleries only) made by Caffieri in 1766 (destined for the ship as refitted for the navy; they differ from the ornaments of the model), and two representations of a plan of the refitted ship as kept in the Danish National Archives (in black and white). The plan is not signed but was made by either Groignard - who had revised the plan for the refit of the ship - or Ollivier - who was responsible for the execution of the refit). Also included are photos of the model of Le Vengeur. This model is from the Musée de la Marine, Paris, and represents the ship as it had been designed by Groignard for the Compagnie des Indes in 1756. The dimensions of the ship as planned in 1755 were: longueur 150 pieds, largeur 40 pieds, creux 19 pieds 6 pouces. However, the dimensions of the ship actually built in 1756 were:

    Longueur étrave-étambot, de rablure en rablure: 158 pieds (51,32m)

    Largeur au maître bau, en dehors des membres: 41 pieds 6 p. (13,48m)

    Creux au maître bau: 20 pieds 6 p. (6,66m)

    The plan of the refitted ship as kept in the Danish National Archives shows that the length was to be extended to 162 pieds. However, a report of Brest engineers dated 1775 says: "Le Vengeur a 166 pieds de longueur et 41 pieds 6 pouces de bau", which means it was even more extended than originally planned.

    The article by Boudriot about the Musée de la Marine model is in Neptunia N° 152 (not N° 38), 4e trimestre décembre 1983, pp.1-8.

    BTW, some people are unable even today to distinguish the 64-gun ship Le Vengeur from the 74-gun ship Le Vengeur du Peuple, ex-Le Marseillois. In the recently published Osprey title on "The Glorious First of June 1794" by a certain Mark Lardas, the Musée de la Marine model is sold to the reader as a representation of Le Vengeur du Peuple (p.27) ... :rolleyes:

    Demerliac has the following information on the Cie des Indes Vengeur (La Marine de Louis XV. Nomenclature des navires français de 1715 à 1774, p. 163, N°. 1785):

    Port: 1399 tonneaux

    Déplacement en charge: 2300 tx

    Longueur: 158' (Quille: 146') x Largeur: 40' 6" x Creux: 17' 6", Tirant d'eau: 19'/21'

     

    And on the navy Vengeur (ibid., p. 47, N°. 294):

    Port: 1250 tonneaux

    Déplacement en charge: 2350 tx

    Longueur: 162' (Quille: 150'?) x Largeur: 41' 6" x Creux: 21', Tirant d'eau: 19' 3 "/20' 9"

     

    • Like 2

    French ship Redoutable (1791)

    in Ships of the line

    Posted

    As mentioned by someone in your second link ("here"), the figurehead of the Superbe was virtually the same as that of Le Commerce de Marseille:

    commerce-de-marseille-2.jpg

    What happened to this type of figurehead after the abolition of the monarchy in 1792 can be seen on this British print:

    Vaisseau_fran%C3%A7ais_le_Commerce_de_Ma

    The crown was replaced by a Phrygian cap and the lilies were carved away and, apparently, painted over with a tricolour.

    The same seems to have happened to other blazons related to the Ancien Régime. E.g., Les États de Bourgogne whose escutcheon - according to a 1790 print - may have shown the arms of Burgundy or the Royal lilies (I'm not quite sure about what I see) received a tricolour escutcheon too when it became La Montagne, if we are to believe De Loutherbourgs 1795 painting of the battle of 1st June 1794:

    https://www.gettyimages.at/detail/illustration/glorious-first-of-june-or-third-battle-of-ushant-between-grafiken/153414662

    Interestingly, the Loutherbourg's 1794 sketch of La Montagne has a distorted figurehead which shows an indistinct cloaked and helmeted warrior figure, probably meant to hold an escutcheon as well:

    Philip_James_de_Loutherbourg_-_La_Montag

    Actually, the painting appears to have it right as it shows the same arrangement as the 1790 French print: there, the escutcheon is held by two angels (or so), though it is still topped by a crown, which was later replaced by a helmet, according to De Loutherbourg.

    As for the Redoutable figurehead. There is another French representation of the mid-19th century in the National Maritime Museum which again shows some indistinct Romano-Greek warrior. As it is a non-contemporary picture nothing can be said about its reliability:

    https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/138980.html

×
×
  • Create New...