HMS Sovereign of the Seas - Bashing DeAgostini Beyond Believable Boundaries

Papatotalos · Friday at 9:25 AM

Hi Kurt,
I think that you are looking for this one. Sorry, it is small.

I keep looking around for you to find a better image.

Papatotalos · Friday at 9:52 AM

PS: Did you see the book of John McKay. There are illustrations and drawings in this book. Also old ones.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Friday at 10:58 AM

Papatotalos said:
PS: Did you see the book of John McKay. There are illustrations and drawings in this book. Also old ones.

McKay's illustrations of many of the decorations are woefully inaccurate as evidenced by comparing them to sources from the time period.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Friday at 11:00 AM

Papatotalos said:
Hi Kurt,
I think that you are looking for this one. Sorry, it is small.
View attachment 558430
I keep looking around for you to find a better image.

What is the source of this picture?

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Saturday at 1:12 AM

The lower balcony charioteer with eagles is complete.

Papatotalos · Sunday at 6:51 AM

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS said:
What is the source of this picture?

The link is to Royal Museums Greenwich.
By South Kensington Museum and Robert Seppings.
I saw the woodwork next to it and it looks very similar to yours. But you are the expert. Not me.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Sunday at 12:16 PM

Papatotalos said:
The link is to Royal Museums Greenwich.
By South Kensington Museum and Robert Seppings.
I saw the woodwork next to it and it looks very similar to yours. But you are the expert. Not me.

Ah, yes. The Seppings model. I am no expert, but for my model, I chose not to rely on the Seppings model for information on the drawings, but only keep it as a secondary reference in case primary references like the Payne engraving, Painting of Peter Pett and Sovereign of the Seas, and the Morgan drawing cannot provide details on how a specific feature should look. Seppings had to rely on available sources in his time, and would have to make assumptions on areas he had no information on as well. It is difficult to separate the feature on one previous model as deriving from historical data or not. Just copying a previous model is no guarantee that a feature is correct or not. So, you have to fill in the gaps with the most trustworthy info or best guesses you can make.

Morgan Drawing. I wish I had a more detailed scan of this.

Another primary source: The Peter Pett Presentation painting. Although this picture provides our only look at the starboard side of the ship, it shows the decorations in a different and more detailed style than the Payne engraving, and a couple changes in the layout of the panels. I will use it for clues as to what and where the Zodiac symbols are on the starboard side. However, all my decorations will follow the Payne style, particularly the brackets (vertical columns) between the decoration panels.

Portrait of Peter Pett and HMS Sovereign of the Seas

Payne engraving

Wolfgang Rotter's model. The only secondary source from a modeler which appears to me to be accurate to the best known historical information today.

Bilge Ratt · Sunday at 1:49 PM

Hi Kurt;

I quite agree with your comments re Seppings' model of the Sovereign. I do not doubt that he did the best he could with the info available, which if my memory serves me correctly, would not have included the well-known portrait of her stern. Seppings' stern has neither grace nor beauty, being seemingly flat in most planes, with an exorbitant number of windows. Henry Culver seems to have based some of his ideas on different sources, as his stern is much improved over Seppings', although still a long way from being a reliable reconstruction.

Ratty

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Sunday at 6:22 PM

The fourth lower balcony panel with the sun rays peaking below clouds under a crown was finished.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Sunday at 6:40 PM

Bilge Ratt said:
Hi Kurt;

I quite agree with your comments re Seppings' model of the Sovereign. I do not doubt that he did the best he could with the info available, which if my memory serves me correctly, would not have included the well-known portrait of her stern. Seppings' stern has neither grace nor beauty, being seemingly flat in most planes, with an exorbitant number of windows. Henry Culver seems to have based some of his ideas on different sources, as his stern is much improved over Seppings', although still a long way from being a reliable reconstruction.

Ratty

So far, I think Wolfgang Rotter's model is probably the best rendition of the ship from what we know about it.

CharlieT · Sunday at 9:05 PM

It is difficult to separate the feature on one previous model as deriving from historical data or not. Just copying a previous model is no guarantee that a feature is correct or not

I wholeheartedly agree with this comment. There are a number of mistakes about the Sovereign that have been repeated far too often.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Sunday at 11:31 PM

CharlieT said:
I wholeheartedly agree with this comment. There are a number of mistakes about the Sovereign that have been repeated far too often.

@CharlieT , if you have any comments or things which you believe should be changed on my model, including the 3-D decorations, don't hesitate to speak up, even if that stage in construction has passed. I'm not afraid to redo or modify things that need changing.

CharlieT · Monday at 11:02 AM

Kurt,
No worries. I've never been accused of being hesitant to speak up. I think, though, that you've read most of what I have to say in my thread on the Sovereign.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Monday at 12:58 PM

CharlieT said:
Kurt,
No worries. I've never been accused of being hesitant to speak up. I think, though, that you've read most of what I have to say in my thread on the Sovereign.

Definitely. I'm a huge fan. Most researchers don't go beyond describing the hull form. If you have any details regarding the fitting and rigging, let me know.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Monday at 12:58 PM

The sun with rays and crown, panel 5 on the lower balcony, is done.

Vfordyce · Monday at 1:41 PM

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS said:
The sun with rays and crown, panel 5 on the lower balcony, is done.
View attachment 559423

Every panel is different. How horrifying!

CharlieT · Monday at 2:31 PM

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS said:
Definitely. I'm a huge fan. Most researchers don't go beyond describing the hull form. If you have any details regarding the fitting and rigging, let me know.

It'll be a while before I get to the rigging, but I can tell you that I will base much of it on Anderson's book, "Rigging in the Age of the Spritsail Topmast." I definitely won't use Payne.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Monday at 4:10 PM

Vfordyce said:
Every panel is different. How horrifying!

You GOT IT! Yeah, they are all different. That's why I'm only 1/3 of the way done after two years. Some will be mirrored to the starboard side, but the Peter Pett presentation painting indicated that ONLY some of them are copied from the port side. @schifferlbauer can attest to how long Wolfgang Rotter worked on his decorations. It took many years.

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS · Monday at 4:13 PM

CharlieT said:
It'll be a while before I get to the rigging, but I can tell you that I will base much of it on Anderson's book, "Rigging in the Age of the Spritsail Topmast." I definitely won't use Payne.

I practically memorized that book while working on La Couronne. It taught me rigging. I even bought an extra copy of it in hardcover from 1982 just to collect it.

RussF · Monday at 4:34 PM

DARIVS ARCHITECTVS said:
You GOT IT! Yeah, they are all different. That's why I'm only 1/3 of the way done after two years. Some will be mirrored to the starboard side, but the Peter Pett presentation painting indicated that ONLY some of them are copied from the port side. @schifferlbauer can attest to how long Wolfgang Rotter worked on his decorations. It took many years.

So you have Payne's work to guide you on the port side. What do you have for the starboard if everything isn't mirrored?