Check the edge of the deck on the 'other side' of the bowsprit: thereis noblack edge visible. So: the deck is going till the outer edge of the planking, and is not enclosed by planking or wale.
With respect to that little box: even if it is a later addition, there must be a reasonfor making that addition. It was not uncommon to modernizi g models: before Birnie got to work, the Genter model had a rather good late 19-century rig, and a matching black/white hull. So, even when it isnot original, but later, what was its function? Jan
Certainly the model has its worth for further research. I only tried to convey my skepticism about some details. Have you noticed, how far down the fenders reach? Normaly they end at the second whale from below. I do not
wish to discuss that hole - we simply do not know; only, curiosly, that it is not in the center of that box.
So if the luizenplicht deck really reaches out to the outside of the hull, it´s a strange thing, isn´t it? I see, however, no problem in doing this on a model.
Here´s something interesting about fenders, on an 18th century retourship (De Gerechtigkeit) and on the Eendracht. Those poles hang on ropes and are not nailed to the hull. Maybe Witsen, too, meant a temporary thing?
Maybe true, but -especially on the HZ-model, that seems to follow real building practice: doors have functioning latches, gratings can be removed, gunportsfunction. Why shoulda piece that is removable in real lifenot be modelled as a removable piece..... But again, I have no real alternative explanation.
I am stilla bit confused over the fact that there seems to be no realentrance to this vinkennet: on both sides it rests onthe deck, and the railingsare fixedto the bulwarks. Why is there no 'doorlike' entrance to this vinkennet? (Eg like the way there is a door in the zetboord in the wais tof the ship.)
Small deck / luizenplecht. I still do not get what you two seem to see as strange in the model. According to me normal construction would be: the upper frameparts (stutten) next to the stem reach approximately the same height as the stem and their tops are covered with the deckplanks. The upper frame parts more to the side of the ship reach a greater height and support the cathead. The deckplanks end against these frame parts; they do not cut the frame parts to reach the outside of the ship. As Witsen says: "the cathead is supported by the middle of the straight frame" (p.90, I). I think this can also be seen in the two pictures of the small deck of the Gent-model I included in my last post, and in Abb.11 of Winter's Hohenzollern-book. If the deckplanking would protrude I would see the ends of the planking on the outside of the ship, and I don't. So, what do you guys see that I don't see?
Maybe we are looking at supports for anchor flukes, to me it sounds likely, and that does not exclude the other anchor support in the waist of the ship. They can both be present at the same time.
Fenders. Witsen says they were 'geslagen' to the side of the ship. This means they were not hanging, but fastened/attached. Thanks for showing the pictures of the hanging variant though.
The horizonal pieces of wood on the bulkheads were always interpreted as steps by me. They look the same as the steps on the outside of the ship, so I thought they were used as steps to get to the 'vinkenet'.
The suggestion that the box was an ammo-box, does not explain the hole, and would be dangerous. The ammo-boxes on the inside of the ship were considered as dangerous too, because a hit in that box would send the contents of the box, roundshot, flying over the deck. Witsen says that's why these boxes were emptied before the battle and the roundshot was placed in rope coils on the deck (p.497, II).
The 6 ships for France. I think these ships were not 3-deckers because the French ordered two-deckers. The contracts, preserved in the archives of the city of Amsterdam, mention two decks and a 'vinkenet'. Rein, are you saying that the two doors in the bulkhead were used as an entrance to the 'vinkenet'? I think the doors are too wide apart for this; they are placed besides the 'vinkenet'. I think they are in the same position as the holes in the bulkhead of the Gent-model. They would give acces to the second deck then, not to the 'vinkenet'. But please correct me if I'm wrong.
The 'vinkenet' was often removed and stored in the hold. It was not a permanent construction. Maybe that's why there aren't any special doors in the bulkhead to give access to this 'net'.
With respect to the luizenplecht I wonder wether we are talking on the same detail. I thought you wanted to restart the duscussion we had last summer: does the deckplanking rest on top of the hullplanking, or does the hullplanking ‘enclose’ the deckplanking. Answer: the model shows deck resting on top of frames and hull planks
With respect to the fenders. Can you indicate were Witsen gives the info, I couln’t find it....
I want to restrict the discussion to the six ships of France. That the horizontal pieces of wood on the Gent model could be steps, is convincing. But they would certainly be useless in a battle because of the pretty high protections made of poles, arming clothes and tied together ropes they put around the upper decks in that case. I disagree that the openings on the French ships are too far out and give access to the upper deck. Not needed; both on the forecastle and halfdeck (near the masts) there are upright ladders for that. The openings on the Gent model you mention are in fact gunports pointing in the waist, a traditional element. Removable shutters, if used or not, would be right next to them. So that´s how I see it. Let´s agree to disagree here. Regards, Rein
Fenders. Let me turn the question around. Why do you think the model does not show 17th century fenders but later ones? Why do you think these have to be later additions? For example, here is another example of the use of fenders on an etch of Nooms: 'two Dutch frigates'. And, Nooms was so kind to show the nails which attach the fenders to the hull.
About Witsen's text describing them and how they were attached, 'werden buitewaerts tegen de scheeps zijde dikmael balcken geslagen', really means attached, not suspended by ropes. As you rightly say Jan, sails were 'aangeslagen' to the spars, but not 'geslagen'. That is a big difference. For the attachment of sails to the spar Witsen uses 'aenslaen' (p.482, II), not 'slaan'.
For the fenders suspended by ropes Witsen uses the word 'wrijfhouten', 'rub-woods' (p.516, I). Since he does not use this word for the fenders he describes on page 62, he must not have meant the rope suspended ones but other ones: the ones we see drawn by Nooms and the ones we see on the model.
Luizenplecht. Ah, finally I get it; you think the slice of wood is the end of the deck. I made this sketch to check if I understand correctly.
So you think this is the construction method used for the model? The frames are 'cut' by the deck planks and the upper part of the frame is placed on top of the deck planks. But, for as far as I can tell, we can only find that slice of wood on one side of the model. Would this mean that we have two different constructions on one model? On one side of the model the frames are cut, on the other side of the model the frames are not cut? Please expand.
You may be right on the fenders, although there is only little evidence forthese fixed fenders. Nooms displays them, but in all other pics I found, they are not there. This model would be (as far as I can see) the only one showing them. Not impossible, but not a very common addition to dutchships of that era.
Do you guys have an opinion on the way the spuigaten on the lower gundeck are formed? It does not look like the way the spuigaten of the upper deck are formed (with a square block around the opening)