HIGH HOPES, WILD MEN AND THE DEVIL’S JAW - Willem Barentsz Kolderstok 1:50

Frank48 said:
Hello Kold, is there also a reason that the lifeboats at the moment that go into the water always bow or not? Sorry that I invaded your yard
Click to expand...
I think the boat was hoisted at a plain level and then lowered towards the water, also in a plain and level position. In such a case it makes not much difference if the bow is fore or aft.
 
Philski said:
My thoughts are the bulkheads are VERY THICK as far as scale goes. Whatare your thoughts
Click to expand...
They certainly are thicker than scale Phil, but once completed. it is not that noticeable.

1650568879756.png

Completed longboat built by Hans Groenenberg.

In the past I have experimented with the Falkonet longboat for my Haarlem, but the shape and size were not period-correct. At this point those aspects are crucial to me so until such a time as when I can successfully build a longboat from scratch using Ab Hoving's plans, this remains the best option.
 
pingu57 said:
Heinrich, excellent work on your Willem B. but also on your lifeboats, and i believe your thougts about the windlass and the two boats are also falling into the right place right now.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much Peter. I am positive that the decision I have taken was the right one!
 
Kolderstok said:
I think the boat was hoisted at a plain level and then lowered towards the water, also in a plain and level position. In such a case it makes not much difference if the bow is fore or aft.
Click to expand...
Thank you Hans.
 
Heinrich said:
Hello Dear Friends

Some time ago, when @Kolderstok Hans replied to the ongoing debate about whether both lifeboats or only one was stored on deck, he referred to an ancient Dutch publication “Sinnepoppen” by Roemer Visscher. Imagine my absolute surprise and delight when @Frank48 Frank sent me this publication in PDF format. Thank you Frank!

Why was I delighted? Because this book - even though it is completely unrelated to historical Dutch shipbuilding and naval archaeology - can be used to throw light on the whole lifeboat issue.

First though, I have to explain the genre of the book and why the book type was instrumental in providing the relevant guidance. The really important parts are marked in bold.

View attachment 304410

This is the title page of the original 1614 edition. The words "Elck wat wils" was Roemer Visscher's personal motto and means "Something for everyone".

View attachment 304411

This is the title page of the 1669 edition and is the edition that @Frank48 Frank sent me.

Sinnepoppen, first published in 1614, is perhaps the most popular emblem book of the Dutch Golden Age. Emblems were generally made up of three components: a title or motto (referred to by the Latin term inscriptio), an illustration (pictura) and an explanatory text in prose or, more often, in verse (subscriptio). True to the Renaissance-period, myths and legends from ancient Greek and Roman literature and Biblical and Christian motifs influenced the emblem genre in a significant way.

The emblematic book referred directly to daily life, resulting in highly recognizable and therefore extremely popular emblem books. These emblems were the perfect vehicle for moralistic lessons, as can be observed in Roemer Visscher`s Sinnepoppen.

The emblematic book as genre was introduced to the Low Countries (Netherlands) in the 1550s and by the 1570s an increasing number of poets wrote in this vernacular. In 1601, Daniel Heinsius published the first emblem book with subscriptions in Dutch, and other prominent poets such as Hooft, Vondel and Roemer Visscher soon followed his example. Nowhere else was the genre to flourish as richly as in the (Northern) Netherlands.

The work contains 183 emblems, divided into three sections, so-called 'schocken'. The word 'schock', meaning 'a set of sixty', refers to the number of emblems in each part of the book.

View attachment 304412

The first Schock.

Initially Visscher only wanted to publish the picturae. Only after the requests of his dearest friends and the commands ("gebeden en geboden") of the publisher Willem Iansz., did Roemer Visscher eventually decide to add short explanatory subscriptions in prose. Still, he asked his readers to pay more attention to the images, made by the unrelated artist Claes Jansz. Visscher.

As such he was a true believer in "a picture paints a thousand words". And herein lies an important clue. The pictures that he had chosen to convey a certain moral lesson, had to be one that was extremely well-known by all and which had to be generally accepted as the truth - in other words, it had to be common knowledge. And with that as background, look at the picture that he chose.

View attachment 304414

The Latin text (the inscriptio) above the picture reads “Sit oneri erit usui” which translates into Dutch as "moge tot last zijn, het zal van nut zijn.” and into English as: “it may be a burden now, but it will be of use.”

So if we now examine the picture (pictura), we see a lifeboat suspended from the side of a Dutch oceangoing vessel. (We know it is a Dutch vessel because of the Dutch Tricolor flags which are clearly depicted). What is important though is that the picture does not indicate a way of transporting the lifeboat, because that would not have been a "burden". No - the word "burden" indicates that he is referring to the process of hoisting the lifeboat onboard the ship, which would have been a burden.

The short verse at the bottom of the picture concludes this page. In Dutch it reads:

"Vedraeght geduldelijck, wat last en ongerief, Van Dat u in de noodt, kan dienstigh zijn an lief.

Translated into English, it reads:

Patiently endure the burden and discomfort; when you need it, it will be useful and kind to you.

The prose part of the emblem is as follows:

View attachment 304415

In Dutch: Als een Schip in de Zee gaet, soo set men het Boot (NOT THE SLOOP!!!) in het groote Schip, het welckaldaer een groote ruymte neemt, ende de Bootgesellen seer in de wech is; dan moet nochtans mee varen, niet tegenstaende alle ongerijf ende ongemaeck datmer af lijdt, om dat men daer mede noodigh moet aen het landt gaen, als men in de Haven komt: daerom dat men met reden zeydt:

Die wat spaert / die wat heest.

In English:

If a ship goes out to sea, the boat is put onboard the big ship where it takes up a lot of space and is in the way of the crew. Despite all the inconvenience and discomfort, they may suffer, the crew has to accept this, because they have to go to land in it when they reach the harbour. That is why he who saves, has.”

Therefore dear friends, like @Kolderstok Hans concluded in his posting, it was vitally important to have both boats onboard – in an emergency, it could mean the difference between life and death.

Thank you so much Hans for pointing me in the right direction, and thank you Frank for the book. Slowly, but surely my Willem Barentsz puzzle is falling into place.
Click to expand...
Gosh how the languages changes over time , I can read it though , anyway how are fairing in China ( Shanghai) with the lockdowns ? Not sure if the MSM gives us an accurate report , anyway stay safe !
 
Heinrich said:
Dear Friends

Last night I posted the dimensions of the Willem Barentsz according to the research of Ab Hoving. To recap, these were his findings:

View attachment 304138

Also bear in mind the Amsterdam Foot

View attachment 304139

Now we move on to the calculations of Gerald de Weerdt, master shipwright of the Barentsz replica ship that is being constructed in Harlingen.

The Willem Barentsz presents a challenge. Whilst the theses of Witsen and Van Yk on Dutch shipbuilding in the 17th Century have been proven by archeological evidence to be factually correct, no such work exists on Dutch shipbuilding in the last quarter of the sixteenth century. Subsequently De Veer’s journal and reports by other Dutch explorers to the polar regions like (Linschoten) in which they describe their types of ships and its dimensions form an invaluable source. From their descriptions, we can see that the word “jacht” is the one most commonly used to describe the type of ship. We also know that two ships were used – one of 30 lasten and the other of 50 lasten respectively. Our choice was to reconstruct the ship on which Willem Barentsz and Jacob Heemskerk (the latter as captain) sailed. Based on the size of the crew – 15 men excluding Heemskerck and Barentsz – we can deduce that the smaller ship (based on the lasten) was the one they most likely used. In comparison to other ships of the same type and era, we can deduce that from stem to stern “our” ship would have been in the region of 65 Amsterdam feet (19 meters).

In the paintings that we have and based on the drawings of De Veer, where the two ships are sailing astern, both seem to be depicted as having the same size. That is hardly surprising as the dimensions of the two ships would only have differed by approximately 20%. For the artist, both were merely two small “jachten” of the same type. Whilst paintings of the 16th century were not always accurate, the drawings of De Veer – especially when combined with his journal – showed remarkable consistency and can therefore not be ruled out as valuable source material.

The most important conclusions we can gather from these drawings of De Veer are:

The ship had two full-length decks – the lower one which housed the cannons
The two decks follow the zeeg (sway) of the berghouten (wales).
The ship was equipped with conventional rigging, three masts, a bowsprit sans blind sail, and whilst the main -and foremasts carried one main- and one marszeil each, the mizzen mast only featured a mizzen sail and no cross sail.
Just below the gun ports there were two relatively thick and heavy wales – directly above them a narrower wale.
The high build-up at the stern probably housed a cabin of sorts.
The bow had a pronounced upwards sweep – not uncommon for the time.

In addition to the above, we also utilized the following resources in our research:

Classification and General Characteristics of ship type: The Barentsz was classified as a "jacht" and as such we know that she was classified as a fast-sailing vessel which would have been streamlined below the water level).)

Paintings and drawings of the time

The discovery of the S01 ship’s wreck which was wrecked in the Waddenzee circa 1593.

Between 1987 and 1997, an archaeological excavation of shipwreck 'Scheurrak SO1' took place in the Wadden Sea. During the archaeological investigation, parts of the ship, sails and rigging, armament, cargo and inventory (more than 6000 artifacts) were excavated, analyzed, conserved and partially documented. The large seagoing merchant ship was built around 1580. During her last voyage, she was transporting grain from the Baltic region. Finds in the wreck showed that the ship sank around 1593. The database consisted of the generated data from this research, such as the field documentation, sub-surveys of ship, rigging, cargo and inventory and various visual material such as slides, photos and drawings.

Dimensions and measurements of key components as documented by Nicolaes Witsen. (Crucial to Witsen’s work was the question of whether or not it would have applied to ships built in the 16th century as well).

Real-life experiences from those involved in the building and sailing of previously constructed replicas.

Given the lack of better or more authoritative information at hand, it was decided that Witsen’s findings would be the best basis for reconstructing the hull. According to Witsen, Dutch shipwrights never adhered to a specific formula or stuck to a certain set of rules when building a ship. Instead, there was plenty of scope for personal interpretation which inevitably resulted in variances. Archeological material and pictures/paintings/drawings had to provide the answers as to the type of variances that were typical during the era of Barentsz.

So with the background sketched, it's time for the nitty gritty.

A general consensus among researchers have always relied on a ratio of 1:4 between the width and length of a Dutch ship. Sometimes, it was slightly more, sometimes slightly less. The S01 wreck, for instance had a ratio of 1:3.7 and was thus slightly wider. As a result of the abovementioned reasons and using S01 as a starting point, a somewhat wider (by 10%) than normal hull shape was chosen. The depth of the hold was also increased by 11% over the average. According to Witsen, the depth of the hold should have been one-tenth of the overall length – thus 6.5 feet – but we decided on the increased depth to correlate with the increased width. A deeper hull would also offer the advantage of better overall stability by acting as counterweight for the high build-up at the stern of the ship.

These then are the measurements and exact formulae as drawn up by Witsen and applied in the construction of the replica by De Weerdt.

The Bow:

Thickness: 1 inch per 10 feet = thus 6.5 inches or 17 cm

Width: Calculated as 3 times the thickness = thus 19.5 inches or 51cm

Height: 18 feet thus = 5,1 m

Calculated as the sum of the depth of the hold (7.5 ft), the zeeg at the front of the ship (1.5 ft) the height between decks (6 ft) height between upper deck and railing (2.5 ft) and the railing itself (0.5 ft) The sway (zeeg) at the stem is calculated according to the formula of 2.25 inches per 10 feet of the ship’s length.

Stern:

Thickness: 6.5 inches (17 cm) The thickness of the stern is normally equal to that of the bow.

Upper Width: 9.75 inches (26 cm) Calculated as 1.5 times the thickness

Lower Width: 32.5 inches (84 cm) Calculated as 5 times the thickness

Height: 15.5 feet (4.4m)

Calculated as the sum of the depth of the hold (7.5 inches), the sway at the stern (3.75 inches) stuurlast of the keel (0.75 feet), height above deck to the hole of the rudder/whipstaff 3.5 feet)

Space between decks: 5.75 feet (1.65m) which was normal for smaller ships. Towards the bow and stern this available space would increase incrementally.

The Keel:

Thickness: 8 inches (21 cm): Calculated as 1,25 times the thickness at the stern and bow

Width: 8 inches (21 cm) the same as the thickness.

The ratio between the thickness and width of the keel varied greatly. From Witsen's writings and other diverse sources it is evident that the thickness was sometimes greater than the width and vice versa. We opted for a square keel of 21 cm which tapers to 17cm the same as the width of the bow and the stern.

With these measurements we now had the basis for the overall dimensions and form of the hull. More specific detail than this does not exist and therefore different interpretations exist within these parameters. For the Barentsz we have chosen a relatively sleek hull – not as bold as that of the S01 ship, but also decidedly rounder than the straight lines of a 17th century ship.

View attachment 304141

Compared to a 17th Century Dutch VOC ship (top drawing) and the S01 shipwreck (at the bottom) which De Weerdt used as basis, it is clear how much sleeker the hull lines of the S01 were. Ultimately these were the lines that De Weerdt adopted for his interpretation of the WB.

And when all is said and done, what are the final dimensions of De Weerdt's ship?

Overall Length: 65.0 feet (18.6 m)
Overall Width: 17.5 feet (4.95 m)
Depth of Hold: 7.5 feet (2,12 m)

So in the final analysis, De Weerdt's WB is two-and-a-half feet shorter, 4 feet narrower and 1,5 feet shallower in draft.

And with that dear friends, we have come to the end of the research on dimensions.

Please note that all information and drawings used are from the book "Het Schip van Willem Barents" by Ab Hoving and Cor Emke with contributions by Peter Sigmond and Gerald de Weerdt.
Click to expand...
This looked like a difficult class room exercise you were about to pose to your students and there should only be one correct answer, now after my head hurts so it's time for a Coffee-Cup
 
Robertd said:
Gosh how the languages changes over time , I can read it though , anyway how are fairing in China ( Shanghai) with the lockdowns ? Not sure if the MSM gives us an accurate report , anyway stay safe !
Click to expand...
Hello Robert. Yes, the language has changed considerably. I had to keep my reminding myself that what looks like an "f" is an actual fact an "s"! :) This time, Covid is an altogether different beast - as soon as it looks like the worst has passed, they discover new cases again. Luckily, the situation in Nantong is not nearly as serious as in Shanghai - however, our close proximity to Shanghai has prompted the government to adopt the same measures for both cities. Starting from tomorrow, the government has increased the total number of classes we have to teach online, so it doesn't seem that they are expecting to reopen the schools soon.
 
Richie said:
This looked like a difficult class room exercise you were about to pose to your students and there should only be one correct answer, now after my head hurts so it's time for a Coffee-Cup
Click to expand...
Do you know how difficult the Maths part was for an English teacher to decipher? ROTF I agree Richie - one answer would have been much easier, but then that would take away all the fun of playing Sherlock Holmes !
 
Heinrich said:
Hello Dear Friends

Some time ago, when @Kolderstok Hans replied to the ongoing debate about whether both lifeboats or only one was stored on deck, he referred to an ancient Dutch publication “Sinnepoppen” by Roemer Visscher. Imagine my absolute surprise and delight when @Frank48 Frank sent me this publication in PDF format. Thank you Frank!

Why was I delighted? Because this book - even though it is completely unrelated to historical Dutch shipbuilding and naval archaeology - can be used to throw light on the whole lifeboat issue.

First though, I have to explain the genre of the book and why the book type was instrumental in providing the relevant guidance. The really important parts are marked in bold.

View attachment 304410

This is the title page of the original 1614 edition. The words "Elck wat wils" was Roemer Visscher's personal motto and means "Something for everyone".

View attachment 304411

This is the title page of the 1669 edition and is the edition that @Frank48 Frank sent me.

Sinnepoppen, first published in 1614, is perhaps the most popular emblem book of the Dutch Golden Age. Emblems were generally made up of three components: a title or motto (referred to by the Latin term inscriptio), an illustration (pictura) and an explanatory text in prose or, more often, in verse (subscriptio). True to the Renaissance-period, myths and legends from ancient Greek and Roman literature and Biblical and Christian motifs influenced the emblem genre in a significant way.

The emblematic book referred directly to daily life, resulting in highly recognizable and therefore extremely popular emblem books. These emblems were the perfect vehicle for moralistic lessons, as can be observed in Roemer Visscher`s Sinnepoppen.

The emblematic book as genre was introduced to the Low Countries (Netherlands) in the 1550s and by the 1570s an increasing number of poets wrote in this vernacular. In 1601, Daniel Heinsius published the first emblem book with subscriptions in Dutch, and other prominent poets such as Hooft, Vondel and Roemer Visscher soon followed his example. Nowhere else was the genre to flourish as richly as in the (Northern) Netherlands.

The work contains 183 emblems, divided into three sections, so-called 'schocken'. The word 'schock', meaning 'a set of sixty', refers to the number of emblems in each part of the book.

View attachment 304412

The first Schock.

Initially Visscher only wanted to publish the picturae. Only after the requests of his dearest friends and the commands ("gebeden en geboden") of the publisher Willem Iansz., did Roemer Visscher eventually decide to add short explanatory subscriptions in prose. Still, he asked his readers to pay more attention to the images, made by the unrelated artist Claes Jansz. Visscher.

As such he was a true believer in "a picture paints a thousand words". And herein lies an important clue. The pictures that he had chosen to convey a certain moral lesson, had to be one that was extremely well-known by all and which had to be generally accepted as the truth - in other words, it had to be common knowledge. And with that as background, look at the picture that he chose.

View attachment 304414

The Latin text (the inscriptio) above the picture reads “Sit oneri erit usui” which translates into Dutch as "moge tot last zijn, het zal van nut zijn.” and into English as: “it may be a burden now, but it will be of use.”

So if we now examine the picture (pictura), we see a lifeboat suspended from the side of a Dutch oceangoing vessel. (We know it is a Dutch vessel because of the Dutch Tricolor flags which are clearly depicted). What is important though is that the picture does not indicate a way of transporting the lifeboat, because that would not have been a "burden". No - the word "burden" indicates that he is referring to the process of hoisting the lifeboat onboard the ship, which would have been a burden.

The short verse at the bottom of the picture concludes this page. In Dutch it reads:

"Vedraeght geduldelijck, wat last en ongerief, Van Dat u in de noodt, kan dienstigh zijn an lief.

Translated into English, it reads:

Patiently endure the burden and discomfort; when you need it, it will be useful and kind to you.

The prose part of the emblem is as follows:

View attachment 304415

In Dutch: Als een Schip in de Zee gaet, soo set men het Boot (NOT THE SLOOP!!!) in het groote Schip, het welckaldaer een groote ruymte neemt, ende de Bootgesellen seer in de wech is; dan moet nochtans mee varen, niet tegenstaende alle ongerijf ende ongemaeck datmer af lijdt, om dat men daer mede noodigh moet aen het landt gaen, als men in de Haven komt: daerom dat men met reden zeydt:

Die wat spaert / die wat heest.

In English:

If a ship goes out to sea, the boat is put onboard the big ship where it takes up a lot of space and is in the way of the crew. Despite all the inconvenience and discomfort, they may suffer, the crew has to accept this, because they have to go to land in it when they reach the harbour. That is why he who saves, has.”

Therefore dear friends, like @Kolderstok Hans concluded in his posting, it was vitally important to have both boats onboard – in an emergency, it could mean the difference between life and death.

Thank you so much Hans for pointing me in the right direction, and thank you Frank for the book. Slowly, but surely my Willem Barentsz puzzle is falling into placE
Click to expand...
Good morning Heinrich. Amazing. @Frank48 is a source of incredible information. The life lessons to be gained from this read are as valuable and applicable as for ship research. Thanks for sharing (you and Frank). Cheers Grant
 
Heinrich said:
It will in all likelihood not be possible, Johan, but it won't be for a lack of trying.

With the practice build of the bigger boat going very well (there are only two planks left to close the hull), three days ago, I started work on the one with the rounded stern which is the one that is actually intended for the Willem Barentsz. And let me tell you, it ain't easy. It took me three days to match the first plank to the dolboord (railing). Both the railing and the first plank had to be laid down in segments and when the glue was dry, adjustments were made for the next section.

View attachment 304433
It is almost impossible to discern which side is the bow and which is the stern.

View attachment 304434

Just like the real ship, the lifeboat has its own sway (zeeg).

And then the really tricky part.

View attachment 304435

Look how much the railing slopes downwards and outwards. This means that the top of the bulkheads have to be faired at an angle as well to allow the railing to sit properly.
Click to expand...
Oh boy- I’m off SOs for 2 days and Heinrich log adds 3 pages resulting in me being super late with the coffee chirps- still Nescafé...hmmm. ROTF.
Heinrich your bow, knight heads etc (after much deliberation) are brilliant and yes you can be really Happy. Making cleats....yep like you I have don’t have appropriate tools. I gave up making them as I could make one great, but couldn’t make them all the same size or shape.(0.4mm.)I ordered some from Dry dock.:cool:.

I am waiting in anticipation for your completed Lifeboat- looks brilliant thus far.

Cheers Grant
 
Hello Grant. Yes the log had a great run the last few days - it just shows you - you cannot afford to bat an eyelid and you miss something ROTF! Seriously though, Frank's library has contributed in no small amount to my final decision - a decision I am very happy to have made. It does mean loads of extra work - try making an octagonal windlass for one :eek: (first six attempts miserable failures) - but all is justified in the quest for realism. Thank you for all the kind words and wonderful support - it makes all the work - both in the shipyard and behind the books - worthwhile!
 
pingu57 said:
You could use a pencil, this is also octagonal Heinrich, you can buy those in all different sizes and colors
Click to expand...
My friend - believe it or not, but I actually thought about that and will remember that as a last resource. I am now busy making one that looks a bit different - but still correct. I will see how that goes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top