Bowsprit of Soleil Royal

[Signet]

One can be sure that you yourself have something valuable and useful to say on this matter. Perhaps you’ll decide to give it a go, just like others here are trying? Just please remember to provide source evidence.

I didn't know that too much information was bad.

 

[-Waldemar-]

I didn't know that too much information was bad.

Well, everyone has their own approach. As for me, no, the sheer volume of information isn’t necessarily a bad thing in itself, of course, but it should be about the desired relevance and the quality of the content as well. On the other hand, it’s even a bit amusing when, in response to a question on a very specific issue, it happens that the respondents don’t address this specific question at all, but instead use the opportunity to talk about everything and anything – about themselves, their own experiences (which, at best, are only loosely related), and so on – or something along the lines of: ‘I don’t know, but I’ll have my say anyway’ .

 

[Vfordyce]

.​

Hi Guillaume,

It is important to be aware that Ancre's goal is not to provide selfless assistance, but rather to run a typical commercial venture aimed at making money. Consequently, they do not offer reprints of works on shipbuilding from that era for sale in order to later ruin their own business by providing free information on demand, and which can be found in these paid reprints by Ancre, or by doing other people's research for them. To be clear, this does not refer to Ancre's numerous monographs on the modern reconstruction of specific ships, but to reprints of older works on shipbuilding of a more general nature. I happen to buy and read these reprints (in addition to Ancre's modern reconstruction monographs), but indeed, from what I can see, the overwhelming majority are not even aware of the existence of the former, let alone their content. And yes, one has to spend many thousands of euros on all these publications.

Returning to your specific question about the bowsprit. A few weeks ago, in response to your query, I showed you the layout of the decks of French capital ships by reproducing some graphic plates from the original work of that time. If you hadn't ignored those graphics, you would have also found the answer to your current issue with the bowsprit there.

In addition, I was also able to easily find a fairly short but very informative text description of the important principles of installing bowsprits on French ships in a reprinted manuscript originating from Toulon and dating from 1683. but what is the point of quoting it when, in practice, at least 95% of such help provided on the forum (and, after all, requiring some effort and time to prepare) turns out to be useless and pointless for various reasons? And I don't think I have as much determination and consistency as Allan, who is truly tireless in this particular activity, despite the enormous inertia he encounters .

.​

Wow!

 

[Signet]

Just some more off-topic information I ran across. Today I looked at a site about the Duyfken, a 3-masted 1600 Dutch Pinacce. I apologize that it is not not the Soleil Royal as the OP requested information on, and is not French, and while the OP asked if its "bowsprit was of center to the right, as customary of 17th century war ships" because while this was a ship that sailed in the 17th century, it was not a warship. But the Australian National Maritime Museum has an interesting virtual tour of a replica of the Duyfken, in which the bowsprit is clearly running beside the foremast:

I apologize in advance again for polluting this thread with off-topic information, but I found it interesting to see a video of the "real thing" even though it's still a replica.