Samuel 1650 – a Dutch mid-17th century trader

[-Waldemar-]

.​

Four years of the most intensive research I could muster has led me to realise that tired rhetoric, devoid of any substantial basis is all that the "students" of naval history is interested in hearing. Inconsistent findings, blatantly misinterpreted information, national misrepresentation, glaring omissions, extreme rudeness and a general disinterest in going beyond the known are all justified at the hand of authored works produced with the sole aim of monetary gain and personal fame - certainly not at finding the facts.

Somehow, I'm still in my thoughts with the archaeological monograph of La Belle 1684 by Texas A&M University Press. Maybe it's because it's a new acquisition, but probably more because I can't get out of my amazement how the analysis and conclusions about the ship itself (as hopefully opposed to its cargo and equipment) can be so badly messed up. The conceptual method was not recognised correctly, the structural features (limber holes) were not recognised correctly, in fact the general type of ship was not even recognised correctly.

The latter is actually evidenced by the fact that completely inappropriate iconography and ship types of the period (barque longue or light frigate) are reproduced and – necessarily quite chaotically – discussed in the monograph, but there is not even a single depiction and commentary on the right type, i.e. the merchant barque of the Atlantic coast of France (Ponant), after all, with so many examples available in a very close chronologically album of ships — Dessins des différentes maniéres de vaisseaux que l'on voit dans les havres, ports et riviéres depuis Nantes jusqu'à Bayonne qui servent au commerce des sujets de Sa Majesté, 1679.

Be that as it may, here are some relevant examples from this album, which could be already included, together with an appropriate commentary, in a possible second edition of the monograph:

Planche 4. Nantes (samples of merchant barques):




Planche 6. Saint-Gilles-Croix-de-Vie (sample of merchant barque):




* * *​

Taking this opportunity, I cannot deny myself a few quotes from a post-publication review of the La Belle monograph (International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 2017.46.2, p. 468–470):


'[…] magnum opus has now arrived […]'.

'[…] meticulously analysed finds underlines both the significance of the wreck and the thoroughness of its investigation'.

'[…] informed mentoring by some of the world’s foremost scholars in the field (not just individual supervisors, but the entire faculty was available for consultation), working within a critical academic culture and drawing on the resources of INA has proven highly productive'.

'The close study and detailed recording of the structure has yielded comprehensive data about a specialized exploratory vessel [? – mine] at a crucial period in global history, and students of naval architecture will appreciate its significance'.

'As well as its outstanding archaeological worth within the wider discipline and for a more nautically focused readership, this project and its three different but related publications are strong additions to our ethical armoury. For a myriad of reasons […], no treasure-hunting venture could ever hope to emulate such an achievement. The challenge is to convince our terrestrial colleagues, and the public at large, that the glossy self-justifying reports treasure-hunters sometimes produce and call archaeology are not what they purport to be. The La Belle publication trilogy — particularly this volume — counters such falsehoods by example and, in doing so, places the powerful sword of truth in our hands'.



I liked most the phrase ‘The La Belle publication […] places the powerful sword of truth in our hands’.

.​

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

And yet another ship design of this period originating from the Atlantic coast of France (French archives).

​

In this case, unlike the transport barque La Belle 1684, it is a warship, designed by Philippe Cochois in 1697. However, despite the drastically different hull shapes, consistent with the function of each of these two vessels, the frigate by Cochois was designed in exactly the same fashion and even in the same sub-variant that was used for La Belle 1684, that is, the North Continental/Dutch method, employing two design diagonals — successors, as it were, to the previous “flat” and “boeisel” lines.

​

Although there are minor differences in the two designs, nevertheless, in conceptual terms, they are not really significant: firstly, in the design of the frigate by Cochois, in addition to ellipses, two-arc blend curves were also used in some frames to connect the contours of the ‘flat’ to the contours of the futtocks; secondly, in order to further sharpen the shapes of the hull, additional sweeps were added to the straight lines of the “flat”, thus connecting the proper of the ‘flat’ to the keel.

A peculiar curiosity is the circumstance that the true design diagonals have been carefully removed and there is no trace of them on the drawing, instead, they have been replaced on the final version of the design by other diagonals performing other functions (proofing and perhaps carpentry and construction).

Note: this is not a complete conceptual reconstruction (and to some extent it even repeats some of the inaccuracies of the original drawing) — in particular, no effort was made to find the method of obtaining the co-ordinates on the diagonals for the final tracing of the frame contours. However, such methods are extensively covered in numerous publications by Jean Boudriot, and it was not considered necessary to waste much time on a relatively secondary issue.

* * *​

By a fortunate coincidence, the juxtaposition of the hull form of the two vessels, that is, the barque La Belle 1684 (exemplified below by the fluit Le Profond 1685 of similar nature/hull shapes) and the frigate by Cochois, can be, by the way, an excellent teaching aid for ship archaeologists, thanks to which they can learn to correctly distinguish, according precisely to the shape of the hull, vessels sporting characteristics of sea predators (such as, for example, the frigate, corvette or barque longue), optimised for the best sailing properties, from transport vessels, such as the merchant barque La Belle 1684, optimised to carry as much cargo as practically possible, necessarily at the expense of sailing properties. And vice versa.

​

Admittedly, such a comparison has already been made, and on this basis the categorical conclusion was expressed by Jean Boudriot in his monograph on La Belle 1684 by Ancre (see below), nevertheless, for some obscure reason, his obvious conclusion was still somehow ignored by the researchers and authors of a later monograph on this ship by Texas A&M University Press.

​

.​

 

[tball4217]

The question I have to ask...

Since this ship is apparently on dry land now, at least pictures of the ship on dry land are shown..

why hasnt anyone ever taken the time to scan it with a 3d laser scanner system.

That would be a clear cut method. Also, it would be very education if the HMS Victory was given a laser scanner go over, and compared to the original plans and specifications. Be fun to see the varations.

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

why hasnt anyone ever taken the time to scan it with a 3d laser scanner system. That would be a clear cut method.

Unfortunately, no. The 3D scanning of the hulls of historical ships (and especially shipwrecks) does not in itself provide the answer to the question of how a ship was designed, which is what I personally strive for. Nor does it yield the true (original) shape of a ship, which, it is quite safe to say, is inevitably distorted by the passage of time and other circumstances. There is usually a very long and arduous path to the final result, i.e. the design concept (design intent) and the real, undistorted forms.

.​