I thought it would be interesting to share some of my observations and point out some inconsistencies so the readers can have a greater respect for the complexity needed when researching and evaluating that research.
First lets look at the contemporary drawings made(probably by Duncan Mcann and referenced by many, such as Crothers.
Here is an example of several interesting inconsistancies….we know the GR sported a modified Forbes double topsail rig as represented here. the mast and topmast doublings are extremely long....outlined by Forbes. to were he slung the lower topsail..and so it could run up and down the outer topmast doubling.
inconsistency #1, by measuring the height of the mast(In scale) it is determined the main yard is not long enough....thus creating a sequential step error in subsequent sail dimensions.
Inconsistency #2, this drawing depicts her with a bulwark, NOT a flush spar deck with her turned post railing. She did not have Forbes rigging when sporting bulwarks...she had Howes topsail rig.
Inconsistency #3, eyewitness accounts say she had no higher sails then Royals....which causes me to question this drawing because of the other blatant issues to include the extra long Royal masts.
View attachment 91634