Be careful when opening the box before you’re ready to begin construction. kit manufacturers pack something called temptation inside. 
HIGH HOPES, WILD MEN AND THE DEVIL’S JAW - Willem Barentsz Kolderstok 1:50
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
I hear you Ron, but no chance of that happening this time around. The WB will be finished first and then there's my caveat of next year's future plans. By my standards the Titanic is a big model, so no construction until I know where I will be.Be careful when opening the box before you’re ready to begin construction. kit manufacturers pack something called temptation inside.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
No problem, Peter - there is still some cake left (really!). Thank you very much for the birthday wishes. It is much appreciated!I guess I've missed the party....
Still, the very best wishes for your birthday Heinrich!!
Wow! Making me hungry! Great party and friends! 
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Thanks Dean. It was a wonderful party - full of fun and laughter.Wow! Making me hungry! Great party and friends!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Dear Friends
As promised, the time has now come to get more serious and to publish the results of the 2012 Russian Expedition. The report below is verbatim in the words of expedition leader, D.F. Kravchenko (unless otherwise noted in which case it will be comments of my own that I have added.
2012 RUSSIAN EXPEDITION - RESEARCH RESULTS:
31.12.2012
Friends! It has been quite a long time since the end of our work on Novaya Zemlya. And although the study of samples and the compilation of gradient maps have not yet been completed, already now much can be "laid out on the shelves".
When an assessment of any work is given, it is necessary to talk about both its results and the mistakes made. Without this approach, the "results" would look dubious...
The tight schedule of the base vessel and the extremely adverse weather conditions did not prevent us from completing most of the planned research. We managed to scan the alleged place of stranding of the caravel of the Dutch expedition of 1596-97, the area of the water area between the first and second reefs. The most interesting results were yielded on the last working day of the expedition. At the edge of the water, at the base of the first reef, 4 fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found. These frames had negative buoyancy. The place where they were found was repeatedly checked on prior expeditions when mapping the coastline, but no parts of the hull had been found there before. Most likely, they were thrown out by the waves the day before, during a storm, when the wind speed reached 25-30 m / s.
It should be noted that among the numerous fragments of the ship's hull discovered between 1978 and 2009, all elements belonged to the surface part of the hull and had positive buoyancy. Such fragments could be carried by the current to very remote parts of the coast. Parts of the hull with negative buoyancy can be washed ashore, usually near the location of the sunken ship.
There can be no doubt that the wooden fragments belong to the Dutch vessel, Dmitry Kravchenko himself does not doubt for a second. The composition of the material of the artifacts found (frames) - is clearly from a deciduous tree, most likely oak. The Pomors did not build their kochi and karbas from oak, it simply did not exist in the north. In addition, the method of fixing the nails and the nails themselves, also testify to their Dutch origin.
Measurements of Fragment 2 (wood, oak)
Color: Close to black
Maximum length: 1770 mm
Maximum width: 170 mm
Average height: 100 mm
The cross-section is rectangular, one end is broken, the other is beveled (cut) at a length of 28 cm at an angle of 40 degrees. There are 11 holes for nails with a diameter of about 31 mm on one side of the fragment (the outer side is rolled, rounded), about 29 mm on the inside. They have 4 nails, of which 1 is 1 protruding with a diameter of 28-30 mm. The distances between the nails from the broken end are as follow:
Outer run-in side: 1-2 235 mm, 2-3 195mm, 3-4 210mm, 4-5 190mm, 5-6 220mm, 6-7 100 mm, 7-8 105mm, 8-9 160mm, 9-10 160mm, 10-11 120mm
Flat inner side: 1-2 235 mm, 2-3 185 mm, 3-4 215 mm, 4-5 190 mm, 5-6 210 mm, 6-7 110 mm, 7-8 115 mm, 8-9 160 mm, 9-10 160 mm, 10-11 125 mm.
Degradation of wood is significant - with cracks and chips present. The fragment was presumably under water for a long time and was thrown to the water's edge relatively recently.
Summary:
Expedition 2012 is over. We are waiting for work in 2013.
Happy New Year dear friends "fellow soldiers"! I wish you health, success and Good Luck!
Sincerely yours Dmitry Kravchenko.
Kravchenko (right) and Victor Boyarsky (1992 and 2005 expedition leader on the left) discuss the fragments found during the 2012 expedition.
This is the same Victor Boyarsky whom @Ab Hoving Ab Hoving met during his visit to Moscow in 1993 following the 1992 Russian Expedition to Nova Zembla and the same Vicor Boyarsky under whose auspices the plaque "Mercurius" was attached in 2005 to the fragments found during that year's expedition.
My Summary:
1. At the writing of this report, the Russians were still awaiting the results of the Radiocarbon Analysis of the fragments.
2. 4 fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found
To be Continued ...
As promised, the time has now come to get more serious and to publish the results of the 2012 Russian Expedition. The report below is verbatim in the words of expedition leader, D.F. Kravchenko (unless otherwise noted in which case it will be comments of my own that I have added.
2012 RUSSIAN EXPEDITION - RESEARCH RESULTS:
31.12.2012
Friends! It has been quite a long time since the end of our work on Novaya Zemlya. And although the study of samples and the compilation of gradient maps have not yet been completed, already now much can be "laid out on the shelves".
When an assessment of any work is given, it is necessary to talk about both its results and the mistakes made. Without this approach, the "results" would look dubious...
The tight schedule of the base vessel and the extremely adverse weather conditions did not prevent us from completing most of the planned research. We managed to scan the alleged place of stranding of the caravel of the Dutch expedition of 1596-97, the area of the water area between the first and second reefs. The most interesting results were yielded on the last working day of the expedition. At the edge of the water, at the base of the first reef, 4 fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found. These frames had negative buoyancy. The place where they were found was repeatedly checked on prior expeditions when mapping the coastline, but no parts of the hull had been found there before. Most likely, they were thrown out by the waves the day before, during a storm, when the wind speed reached 25-30 m / s.
It should be noted that among the numerous fragments of the ship's hull discovered between 1978 and 2009, all elements belonged to the surface part of the hull and had positive buoyancy. Such fragments could be carried by the current to very remote parts of the coast. Parts of the hull with negative buoyancy can be washed ashore, usually near the location of the sunken ship.
There can be no doubt that the wooden fragments belong to the Dutch vessel, Dmitry Kravchenko himself does not doubt for a second. The composition of the material of the artifacts found (frames) - is clearly from a deciduous tree, most likely oak. The Pomors did not build their kochi and karbas from oak, it simply did not exist in the north. In addition, the method of fixing the nails and the nails themselves, also testify to their Dutch origin.
Measurements of Fragment 2 (wood, oak)
Color: Close to black
Maximum length: 1770 mm
Maximum width: 170 mm
Average height: 100 mm
The cross-section is rectangular, one end is broken, the other is beveled (cut) at a length of 28 cm at an angle of 40 degrees. There are 11 holes for nails with a diameter of about 31 mm on one side of the fragment (the outer side is rolled, rounded), about 29 mm on the inside. They have 4 nails, of which 1 is 1 protruding with a diameter of 28-30 mm. The distances between the nails from the broken end are as follow:
Outer run-in side: 1-2 235 mm, 2-3 195mm, 3-4 210mm, 4-5 190mm, 5-6 220mm, 6-7 100 mm, 7-8 105mm, 8-9 160mm, 9-10 160mm, 10-11 120mm
Flat inner side: 1-2 235 mm, 2-3 185 mm, 3-4 215 mm, 4-5 190 mm, 5-6 210 mm, 6-7 110 mm, 7-8 115 mm, 8-9 160 mm, 9-10 160 mm, 10-11 125 mm.
Degradation of wood is significant - with cracks and chips present. The fragment was presumably under water for a long time and was thrown to the water's edge relatively recently.
Summary:
Expedition 2012 is over. We are waiting for work in 2013.
Happy New Year dear friends "fellow soldiers"! I wish you health, success and Good Luck!
Sincerely yours Dmitry Kravchenko.
Kravchenko (right) and Victor Boyarsky (1992 and 2005 expedition leader on the left) discuss the fragments found during the 2012 expedition.
This is the same Victor Boyarsky whom @Ab Hoving Ab Hoving met during his visit to Moscow in 1993 following the 1992 Russian Expedition to Nova Zembla and the same Vicor Boyarsky under whose auspices the plaque "Mercurius" was attached in 2005 to the fragments found during that year's expedition.
My Summary:
1. At the writing of this report, the Russians were still awaiting the results of the Radiocarbon Analysis of the fragments.
2. 4 fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found
To be Continued ...
Gotta try matching mail spacing to scale.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
You lost me there Vic!
Sorry, didn’t have glasses on. I meant nail spacing.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Dear Friends
Yesterday, I posted on the findings of the Russian Expedition of 2012. These findings were issued in a press release format and reported on by various publications.
Above and below are just a few of the examples of press reports on the findings of the 2012 Russian Expedition. The reports which are framed in red, are the ones which mention the name "Mercury" explicitly. As can be seen from these, there is no doubt in Russia as to the identity of Barentsz's ship.
In case you have not yet read the findings of the report, I will repeat it.
1. 4 x fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found
2. At the writing of this report, the Russians were still awaiting the results of the Radiocarbon Analysis of the fragments.
HOWEVER, HERE COMES:
Ask no questions and hear no lies, but I discovered a second set of “inter-departmental” findings which were communicated by Government Gazette to the various state departments and organizations involved in the expedition. These reported findings are VERY different to the ones that were released to the common press.
"The Russian Geographical Society reported that the expedition to search for the Willem Barents' caravel the 'Mercury', which was trapped by ice near Novaya Zemlya in the XVI century, had been completed. The expedition discovered large quantities of frame fragments (another communique lists the actual number as 20 frames) from the bottom part of the caravel, keel components and parts of the rigging.
It will only be possible to reliably confirm that these finds belong to the Mercury after conducting a radiocarbon analysis of wood at the Geological Institute. These results are expected by the end of January.
Metal objects from the caravel were not found by the expedition participants.
You will understand that I do not disclose the weblinks to the various State Departments for the time being.
My Interpretation:
1. Clearly the expedition found a much larger portion of the wreck than what was communicated to the common press and to the public.
2. Twenty frames, keel components and portions of the rigging may very well have constituted all that was needed to do a reconstruction of the vessel. 3. Note that "Reconstruction" does not refer to a physical reconstruction or build of a replica, but rather to the researchers having acquired sufficient knowledge to know how the ship was originally constructed and to have an accurate idea of its actual shape, size and tonnage.
4. The researchers are still waiting the results of the radio-carbon analysis to confirm that these finds belong to the "Mercury".
Yesterday, I posted on the findings of the Russian Expedition of 2012. These findings were issued in a press release format and reported on by various publications.
Above and below are just a few of the examples of press reports on the findings of the 2012 Russian Expedition. The reports which are framed in red, are the ones which mention the name "Mercury" explicitly. As can be seen from these, there is no doubt in Russia as to the identity of Barentsz's ship.
In case you have not yet read the findings of the report, I will repeat it.
1. 4 x fragments of frames that belonged to the bottom part of the caravel's hull were found
2. At the writing of this report, the Russians were still awaiting the results of the Radiocarbon Analysis of the fragments.
HOWEVER, HERE COMES:
Ask no questions and hear no lies, but I discovered a second set of “inter-departmental” findings which were communicated by Government Gazette to the various state departments and organizations involved in the expedition. These reported findings are VERY different to the ones that were released to the common press.
"The Russian Geographical Society reported that the expedition to search for the Willem Barents' caravel the 'Mercury', which was trapped by ice near Novaya Zemlya in the XVI century, had been completed. The expedition discovered large quantities of frame fragments (another communique lists the actual number as 20 frames) from the bottom part of the caravel, keel components and parts of the rigging.
It will only be possible to reliably confirm that these finds belong to the Mercury after conducting a radiocarbon analysis of wood at the Geological Institute. These results are expected by the end of January.
Metal objects from the caravel were not found by the expedition participants.
You will understand that I do not disclose the weblinks to the various State Departments for the time being.
My Interpretation:
1. Clearly the expedition found a much larger portion of the wreck than what was communicated to the common press and to the public.
2. Twenty frames, keel components and portions of the rigging may very well have constituted all that was needed to do a reconstruction of the vessel. 3. Note that "Reconstruction" does not refer to a physical reconstruction or build of a replica, but rather to the researchers having acquired sufficient knowledge to know how the ship was originally constructed and to have an accurate idea of its actual shape, size and tonnage.
4. The researchers are still waiting the results of the radio-carbon analysis to confirm that these finds belong to the "Mercury".
I'm a little confused. How would carbon dating confirm it was the Mercury? We know Barentsz was there but do we know for sure which ship he was on? I thought there was some doubt about that but I may have missed something. If they could confirm from the shape of the frames that it was the Mercury, I think that would be more accurate.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Hi Don - thank you for the question. Since 2005, the Russians are absolutely sure that Barentsz's ship was called De Mercurius (Mercury). Since 2005 already, a fragment of a frame (discovered by the expedition of the Russian Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage under the leadership of Pyotr Boyarsky) and which is exhibited in the Museum of the History of the Murmansk Shipping Company, has been labeled "Mercury". As you can see in all the press reports, the name Mercury has been widely used by all researchers and government departments involved in the research and expeditions.
As to why the Russians are so sure of the name, I am not yet sure, but my research - done completely independently from the Russians, has brought me to the exact same conclusion. The goal of this expedition was therefore not to establish the name (that they knew already), instead they wanted to find the final resting place of the ship, uncover as many parts of the hull as they could and confirm that those parts were indeed from a Dutch vessel of the late 16th century. For that, radio-carbon analysis was used.
Good afternoon Heinrich. That is all so special. There is no doubt you had a fantastic and rewarding birthday. Stunning gifts……and some delicious oystersThe party was a great one!
View attachment 358656
View attachment 358657
View attachment 358658
This fellow escaped the gallows - well at least as far as we were concerned.
View attachment 358659
Peking duck - the real McCoy!
View attachment 358660
Hmmmm ...
. Cheers Grant
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Dear Friends
This posting focuses on the results of the radiocarbon analysis and the possibility of an expedition in 2013.
RESULTS OF THE RADIOCARBON ANALYSIS - DMITRY KRAVCHENKO
Dear friends, we are glad to inform you the results of radiocarbon dating of a wood sample!
The laboratory of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences obtained the results of radiocarbon analysis of fragments of frames discovered by the expedition in 2012. The age of the wood dates back to the end of the XVI century, which allows us to confidently say that these are parts of the ship's hull of the Willem Barents Caravel - the "Mercury".
My Interpretation:
This serves as conclusive evidence that the parts recovered by the 2012 expedition, were from the ship of Willem Barentsz.
At this point, Kravchenko was riding the crest of the wave - his expedition had proved successful in locating large parts of the wreck and these parts were identified as belonging to a ship of the late Sixteenth Century. However, Kravchenko was not yet satisfied. I have noted previously that no metal artifacts (excluding the nails in the frame fragments) of the vessel had been found and this was something that Kravchenko wanted to accomplish. Retrieving - for instance - one of the ship's cannons, would prove the provenance of the ship without any shadow of a doubt. He thus immediately set to work organizing an expedition for later in 2013. See below:
2013 EXPEDITION:
In January of 2013, Kravchenko announced:
The Expeditionary Commission of the Russian Geographical Society recommended allocating a grant for the Underwater Research Program of the Russian Geographical Society to research the Willem Barents caravel during the period 2013-2018.
That's great news!
The 2013 expedition was scheduled for August - September and it was assumed that the research would last at least a month. The National Park of the Russian Arctic, the Arkhangelsk Museum of Local Lore, the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, were all onboard to support the project while the issue of scientific cooperation with the Arctic Floating University (a project of the Northern Arctic Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov (NArFU) was being considered. By agreement with the Northern Shipping Company, the expedition was to go to sea on August 17-18, 2013. Kravchenko had again assembled the 2012 expedition team and the date of departure was agreed upon after consultation with 2012 partner, Belfreight.
HOWEVER, IN TRUE FASHION FOR THIS SHIP THERE WAS ...
On August 9, 2013, the head of regional programs of the Sever-Nash Foundation, Vladimir Klimko, without prior communication with Kravchgenko, sent a letter to the Russian Geographical Society, notifying that the Foundation "postpones its participation in the project to 2014".
Such a sharp turn was a complete surprise to Kravchenko who was completely unprepared for such an announcement. For several weeks, he tried to save the expedition, and did everything possible to make it happen in 2013. Unfortunately, the deadlines were missed, and it became clear that it would not be possible to carry out the planned work in the Ice Harbor.
In 2014, there was talk of another expedition - it was even announced in the press (see below)
And once again, it did not materialize (at least not as far as my findings show).
And with that, the thread of the Russian expeditions and news of Dmitry Kravchenko abruptly came to an end.
My Interpretation:
The only logical explanation that I can find for this is that the proof of the 2012 Expedition, had been considered conclusive enough that any further expeditions were deemed unnecessary.
And that, my dear friends, is where I am tonight. In my heart of hearts, I know that Willem Barentsz's ship was called De Mercurius - why the Russians are so sure about this, we will probably never know (unless I can speak to either Kravchenko - if he is still alive - or Peter Boyarsky) but the fact that their results and my results have yielded the same conclusion, is something of which I am immensely proud and it is more than good enough for me.
No, I will not change the name of my current build to De Mercurius - I have come too long a way with the WB to change that, but somewhere, some day in the far distant future and with the grace of God, De Mercurius is waiting for me.
This posting focuses on the results of the radiocarbon analysis and the possibility of an expedition in 2013.
RESULTS OF THE RADIOCARBON ANALYSIS - DMITRY KRAVCHENKO
Dear friends, we are glad to inform you the results of radiocarbon dating of a wood sample!
The laboratory of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences obtained the results of radiocarbon analysis of fragments of frames discovered by the expedition in 2012. The age of the wood dates back to the end of the XVI century, which allows us to confidently say that these are parts of the ship's hull of the Willem Barents Caravel - the "Mercury".
My Interpretation:
This serves as conclusive evidence that the parts recovered by the 2012 expedition, were from the ship of Willem Barentsz.
At this point, Kravchenko was riding the crest of the wave - his expedition had proved successful in locating large parts of the wreck and these parts were identified as belonging to a ship of the late Sixteenth Century. However, Kravchenko was not yet satisfied. I have noted previously that no metal artifacts (excluding the nails in the frame fragments) of the vessel had been found and this was something that Kravchenko wanted to accomplish. Retrieving - for instance - one of the ship's cannons, would prove the provenance of the ship without any shadow of a doubt. He thus immediately set to work organizing an expedition for later in 2013. See below:
2013 EXPEDITION:
In January of 2013, Kravchenko announced:
The Expeditionary Commission of the Russian Geographical Society recommended allocating a grant for the Underwater Research Program of the Russian Geographical Society to research the Willem Barents caravel during the period 2013-2018.
That's great news!
The 2013 expedition was scheduled for August - September and it was assumed that the research would last at least a month. The National Park of the Russian Arctic, the Arkhangelsk Museum of Local Lore, the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, were all onboard to support the project while the issue of scientific cooperation with the Arctic Floating University (a project of the Northern Arctic Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov (NArFU) was being considered. By agreement with the Northern Shipping Company, the expedition was to go to sea on August 17-18, 2013. Kravchenko had again assembled the 2012 expedition team and the date of departure was agreed upon after consultation with 2012 partner, Belfreight.
HOWEVER, IN TRUE FASHION FOR THIS SHIP THERE WAS ...
On August 9, 2013, the head of regional programs of the Sever-Nash Foundation, Vladimir Klimko, without prior communication with Kravchgenko, sent a letter to the Russian Geographical Society, notifying that the Foundation "postpones its participation in the project to 2014".
Such a sharp turn was a complete surprise to Kravchenko who was completely unprepared for such an announcement. For several weeks, he tried to save the expedition, and did everything possible to make it happen in 2013. Unfortunately, the deadlines were missed, and it became clear that it would not be possible to carry out the planned work in the Ice Harbor.
In 2014, there was talk of another expedition - it was even announced in the press (see below)
And once again, it did not materialize (at least not as far as my findings show).
And with that, the thread of the Russian expeditions and news of Dmitry Kravchenko abruptly came to an end.
My Interpretation:
The only logical explanation that I can find for this is that the proof of the 2012 Expedition, had been considered conclusive enough that any further expeditions were deemed unnecessary.
And that, my dear friends, is where I am tonight. In my heart of hearts, I know that Willem Barentsz's ship was called De Mercurius - why the Russians are so sure about this, we will probably never know (unless I can speak to either Kravchenko - if he is still alive - or Peter Boyarsky) but the fact that their results and my results have yielded the same conclusion, is something of which I am immensely proud and it is more than good enough for me.
No, I will not change the name of my current build to De Mercurius - I have come too long a way with the WB to change that, but somewhere, some day in the far distant future and with the grace of God, De Mercurius is waiting for me.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
UNKNOWN RUSSIAN ODE TO WILLEM BARENTSZ, THE MERCURY AND VALDISLAV ZHDAN
Prelude:
I saw a footprint
At the crossroads of ancient trails.
There's someone wandering around...
Others will say it's delusional.
That neither Cristóbal, nor Barents, nor Cabot have spoken to him.
Theirs was fruitless, science,
They did not reveal to the world the silence of the miraculous
They have disappeared up to their eyebrows in the dust of archives.
There to go, perhaps, everyone can
And see what is needed in reality.
They don't need to be in disbelief.
But Peter the Skipper says, "I won't invite them here."
The Ode:
I am Willem Barents - a handsome husband,
a fearless warrior and servant.
Armada glorious I run
For the glory of the Dutch merchant.
Peter Plancius himself gave me courses
On the map, from the brad I cut my hair,
And threads of this in the seas I hold stubbornly:
Oh! More than once I knew her hot temper!
Let the leak be given in the hold of the dossier,
Let the crew of the scurvy fall ill-
I will not turn in the ice of the harsh seas:
Prison is a debt to me, God sees!
I invested in the mortgage thoughtlessly,
sprouted palaces, silks and gilded gates.
In the cold fierce now I freeze,
Pomor, O Russian!, but where are you, my brother?!
Why was I so greedy?
Why did you think about fame?
Oh, chilly, chilly, cold
And no one hears our farewell alarm...
I don't need the mansions now,
And I don't need the moorish servant livery.
But something warms the heart... But what?!.
Ah, yes - eyelashes through frost
"Mercury" my decent shines:
Told pomors Zhdan about me!
I see the light - the abode on Rublevka.
There, the old Master breathed life into me!
My lord! My God!
Now forever yours I am only a servant.
Ask for diamonds and gold,
Ask for miracles unseen before.
I'll reveal a secret course to you
For calling me out.
Prelude:
I saw a footprint
At the crossroads of ancient trails.
There's someone wandering around...
Others will say it's delusional.
That neither Cristóbal, nor Barents, nor Cabot have spoken to him.
Theirs was fruitless, science,
They did not reveal to the world the silence of the miraculous
They have disappeared up to their eyebrows in the dust of archives.
There to go, perhaps, everyone can
And see what is needed in reality.
They don't need to be in disbelief.
But Peter the Skipper says, "I won't invite them here."
The Ode:
I am Willem Barents - a handsome husband,
a fearless warrior and servant.
Armada glorious I run
For the glory of the Dutch merchant.
Peter Plancius himself gave me courses
On the map, from the brad I cut my hair,
And threads of this in the seas I hold stubbornly:
Oh! More than once I knew her hot temper!
Let the leak be given in the hold of the dossier,
Let the crew of the scurvy fall ill-
I will not turn in the ice of the harsh seas:
Prison is a debt to me, God sees!
I invested in the mortgage thoughtlessly,
sprouted palaces, silks and gilded gates.
In the cold fierce now I freeze,
Pomor, O Russian!, but where are you, my brother?!
Why was I so greedy?
Why did you think about fame?
Oh, chilly, chilly, cold
And no one hears our farewell alarm...
I don't need the mansions now,
And I don't need the moorish servant livery.
But something warms the heart... But what?!.
Ah, yes - eyelashes through frost
"Mercury" my decent shines:
Told pomors Zhdan about me!
I see the light - the abode on Rublevka.
There, the old Master breathed life into me!
My lord! My God!
Now forever yours I am only a servant.
Ask for diamonds and gold,
Ask for miracles unseen before.
I'll reveal a secret course to you
For calling me out.
Excellent coverage of the expeditions and findings. This has been interesting reading for sure!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Thank you, Dean.Excellent coverage of the expeditions and findings. This has been interesting reading for sure!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2020
- Messages
- 10,454
- Points
- 938
Much obliged Johan.