USS Constitution 1812 stern – revised HiSModel proposal
Dear fellow ship modelers,
some time ago, we released our first alternative stern for the Revell 1:96
USS Constitution kit. That earlier version was based mainly on Karl Heinz Marquardt’s
The 44-Gun Frigate USS Constitution, where several possible stern configurations are shown on page 67, including a six-window configuration associated with 1812.
Caption: Marquardt’s comparison of several stern and gallery configurations, including the six-window 1812 interpretation that served as the basis for our earlier HiSModel stern.
After presenting our stern, a detailed discussion developed on ModelShipWorld about whether that reconstruction really represented the most likely appearance of the ship during the War of 1812, and especially around the time of the battle with
HMS Java. Several factual objections and alternative interpretations were raised. It became clear to us that this subject deserved a deeper look.
Because of that, we got in touch with
Marcus.K, who then greatly enriched the discussion with research, source comparisons, images, diagrams, and thoughtful interpretation. His work helped us understand that the stern of
USS Constitution around 1812 was not a simple or closed question. It was more like a careful reconstruction problem, where written descriptions, paintings, plans, contemporary models, and later interpretations all have to be compared critically.
Unfortunately, the original ModelShipWorld thread is no longer available after the recent loss of older MSW content. However, we had preserved notes, screenshots, images, and conclusions from that discussion. Based on those materials, we would now like to briefly explain how this new design came about.
Background and sources considered
The central question was not only how the stern of
Constitution looked “in general”, but how it may have looked specifically during the active wartime period of 1812, and especially around the time of her famous battle with
HMS Java in December 1812.
Several sources and interpretations were compared: early descriptions of the ship’s decoration, the Doughty/Humphreys-related design logic, Felice Cornè’s paintings, George Ropes Jr.’s representation, later reconstructions, the Isaac Hull / crew model, repair notes, and comparisons with other contemporary frigates.
Caption: Felice Cornè’s depiction of Constitution. A valuable period visual source, but one that has to be read carefully, since it is a painting and not a technical drawing.
Caption: George Ropes Jr.’s representation, another useful visual reference for the early 1810s appearance and general stern character.
One of the key points raised in the original MSW discussion was that we should be very careful when reading artistic sources. Paintings such as those by Felice Cornè are extremely valuable, but they are not technical drawings. Details of the stern decoration are small, sometimes ambiguous, and may reflect artistic emphasis rather than exact documentation.
At the same time, the Isaac Hull / crew model is a very important witness for the 1812 period. It gives us a more direct three-dimensional reference for the wartime appearance of the ship, even though it also has to be interpreted with care.
Caption: The Isaac Hull / crew model, one of the most important references for the 1812 appearance of Constitution’s stern.
Marcus.K’s work was especially useful because he did not simply accept one source over another. Instead, he compared individual elements: the number and height of windows, the form of the transom, the relationship between the taffrail and the quarter pieces, the possible function of round openings, the position of allegorical figures, the role of stars and wreaths, and the symbolic composition around the eagle.
Other modern interpretations were also considered as useful comparison material, even if they were not the basis for our earlier HiSModel part.
Caption: One modern model interpretation of the 1812 stern appearance. It was not the basis for our earlier HiSModel stern, but it is useful as another comparison point.
Caption: Preserved comparison from the earlier MSW discussion, showing how different interpretations of the stern appearance can lead to different design choices.
The national symbolism was also discussed. The central eagle, stars, wreaths, and possible bust or symbolic figure above the eagle all belong to the broader federal iconography of the period. For this reason, we also considered contemporary American symbolic references, not as direct proof of the stern design, but as useful context for the visual language.
Caption: The Great Seal of the United States as a reference for federal eagle symbolism and the broader national visual language of the period.
Our revised 1812 stern proposal
After about one year of additional development and design work, we have now prepared a new, much more detailed version of the stern. This new proposal is intended to represent a plausible appearance of
USS Constitution around the time of the battle with
HMS Java in December 1812.
Main design decisions in the new version
Our new design keeps the basic arrangement of
six stern windows, but with a reduced window height and each window divided into
four panes. Between the windows we added slightly raised pilasters with small capitals and leaf ornamentation. This was intended to reflect the idea that the stern was not simply a flat wall with windows, but a decorated architectural composition.
The side galleries themselves remain based on our existing design, but the central stern area was completely reworked. The upper part of the transom and the transition toward the side galleries are now framed with a decorative rope-like molding, giving the whole stern a more unified and period-looking composition. The upper line of the transom was also adjusted so that it visually aligns with the top level of the side railings.
At the ends of the side railings we included the stern davits for the ship’s boat. These were treated as a practical and historically meaningful feature of the ship rather than as a purely decorative addition.
For the central decoration, we placed a bust of
George Washington in the upper central area, with the American eagle below it. We are fully aware that the exact interpretation of this central motif is one of the more debatable points. Some readings suggest a bust, others may see a more abstract symbolic emblem, sunburst, or another form of national iconography. We chose the Washington bust because it fits the symbolic language discussed in the earlier MSW thread and gives the composition a clear American federal character.
On both sides of the central state symbols we placed round openings surrounded by leaf wreaths. Their exact function is not entirely certain. They could be interpreted as gunports, but another interpretation discussed earlier was that they may have been hawse-type openings for handling lines over the stern. We therefore treated them as circular functional openings decorated by wreaths, without insisting on only one interpretation.
Outside these round openings we added simplified allegorical female figures, intended to represent virtues such as
Wisdom / Prudence and
Justice, following the symbolic language mentioned in early descriptions and seen in some contemporary interpretations. We did not try to make them overly sculptural or theatrical. The intention was to keep them simple enough to be believable as wartime decoration, while still preserving the symbolic meaning.
The composition was completed with several decorative stars and additional small female allegorical figures near the outer stern window pilasters. Again, the purpose was not to overload the stern, but to create a balanced arrangement that includes the main symbolic elements repeatedly mentioned or suggested by the sources and previous research: the eagle, stars, wreaths, allegorical figures, and national symbolism.
Caption: New revised HiSModel stern proposal – front view.
Caption: New revised HiSModel stern proposal – perspective view.
Caption: New revised HiSModel stern proposal – opposite perspective view.
Feedback welcome
Our aim was to create a stern that is more historically informed than our previous version, but still usable and visually coherent as an aftermarket part for model builders. We are not claiming that every detail is proven beyond doubt. With a subject like the 1812 stern of
USS Constitution, that would not be realistic. However, we believe this new version better reflects the accumulated discussion and offers a more plausible representation of the ship during the Java period.
We would like to sincerely thank
Marcus.K for the enormous amount of research and thoughtful interpretation he contributed to the original MSW discussion. Even though the old thread is gone, his work was not lost for us and had a direct influence on this new design.
We would also be very grateful for feedback from the Ships of Scale community. If you see something that should be corrected, please let us know. We are still in the stage where reasonable changes can be incorporated before final production.
Our current plan is to offer
both versions of the stern: the earlier HiSModel alternative stern, based mainly on the Marquardt reconstruction, and this new, more developed 1812 interpretation. That way, each modeler can choose the version that best fits their own view, taste, and level of historical interpretation.
Thank you for reading, and we look forward to your comments.
Best regards,
Tomáš / HiSModel
Watch the video 
