289NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

HMS Ardent: A King’s Ship, ButWhich King?

. . . . .by Ron Neilson

The Historical Perspective

HMS Ardent was a 64-gun, third-rate ship-of-the-line of the Royal Navy,launched on August 13, 1764. The warshipwas built under contract at Hull, Englandaccording to the plans of Royal Navy archi-tect, Sir Thomas Slade. Ordered nearlythree years earlier, in December 1761,Ardent was one of Slade’s lesser known

nautical design achievement; for periodsailing ship modelers he is most famous forhis design of HMS Victory.

Slade also designed Ardent’s progen-itor, Asia, the first true 64-gun warship.The Royal Navy abandoned earlier 60-gunships and commissioned additional 64’sthat incorporated alterations learned fromtrials with Asia. Subsequent ships werelarger; the first of the new 64’s being

Figure 1. Starboard view, full broadside. The model is 54 inches long. All photographs by the author.

290 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

Ardent, the lead ship of its class.Slade’s Ardent Class used the lines

of a captured French 64-gun ship, LeFougueux, a prize taken in 1747. Ardentwas built to incorporate important ele-ments of the French ship’s design, particu-larly the increased tumblehome of the hull.As the weight and total number of arma-ments escalated during the mid-eighteenth-century, so did the need to pay closerattention to a warship’s center of gravityvis-à-vis its sailing qualities.

The renowned English frigate,Indefatigible, also built to the identical 64-gun plans as Ardent, was not launcheduntil twenty years later in 1784. Slade’ssuccessful design was revived in 1777 forfive further Ardent-class ships:Raisonnable, Agamemnon, Stately,Belliqueux, and Nassau, for a total of sevenships built to his plans. Slade himself haddied six years earlier, in 1771. The basicArdent-class specifications were:

Length on keel: 144 feetBeam: 44 feet 6 inchesDisplacement: 1,376 tonsCrew complement: 500Armament upon commissioning:Main gun deck: twenty-six 24-poundersUpper gun deck: twenty-six 18-poundersQuarterdeck: ten 4-poundersForecastle: two 9-pounders

Ship and armaments technology wasescalating rapidly by the 1780s. As a conse-quence, the mid-century 64-gun third rateswere underpowered to stand in the line.Additionally, most captains preferredsmaller, faster ships (including the razéefrigates cut-down from 64’s) over the “oldschool 64” that was much too slow and dif-ficult to maneuver against the faster war-ships of England’s adversaries. The frigatewas fast becoming a marauder of choice for

Figure 2. The starboard stern view.

291NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

many types of naval engagements.As noted, the 64 had become an

underpowered warship and 74-gun capitalships had taken their place as the preferredthird rate ships-of-the-line. The 74’s (andmany frigates) could throw a heavierweight of ordnance than the outmoded 64.The technological development and rapiddeployment of the carronade—a devastat-ing, close-range naval weapon—quicklytipped the scales in favor of the fast frigateand the 74’s as fleet “staples.” Increasingly,close-action battles, “cutting out” boardingactions and prize captures favored this newarmament technology, too, as resources forboth shipbuilding and manning the RoyalNavy were being depleted rapidly.

By the close of the eighteenth century,third rate 64’s consequently served otherimportant roles, such as deployment oncolonial expeditions and blockading duty.Indeed, by the beginning of the NapoleonicWars in 1803, the notional total number ofships-of-the-line in seagoing condition wasapproximately one hundred and eleven,according to noted British naval historian,Brian Lavery. Of this total, there were noless than thirty-eight commissioned 64’sstill in service in the Royal Navy. The 64’swere particularly well suited for intimida-tion, especially in far-flung colonial ports.They helped immensely in warding offpesky privateers. They also became a rou-

tine military escort ship for convoys,accompanying the Indiamen of the lucra-tive East India Company.

Ardent had a somewhat tumultuouscareer. The ship was captured by theFrench in 1779 in the English Channel andthen re-captured by Britain in April 1782 atthe Battle of the Saintes in the West Indies.My research was unable to uncoverArdent’s service background for its first tenyears of life; the period from its launchingin 1764 to 1774 remains a mystery. Theonly known fact from this period is thatArdent was one of the first 64-gun shipsput into commission as a consequence ofconflicts with Spain over possession of theFalkland Islands.

We do know that Ardent wasdeployed to the North American station,based at Halifax, Nova Scotia, in October1774 under Captain Sir George Douglas.This appears to be the first record of itsservice. In 1778, under the command ofCaptain George Keppel, Ardent was postedto Admiral Lord Howe’s squadron off NewYork, defending the British colonial cityfrom a larger French fleet attack under thecommand of Admiral le Comte d’Estaing.The two forces engaged in battle off RhodeIsland on August 11, 1778, though bothfleets were scattered by a storm over thefollowing two days. Ardent returned hometo Portsmouth, England and was paid off in

Figure 3. The starboard bow view. Figure 4. The forecastle and partial bow. Anchors areshipped and chained for action.

292 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

January 1779.Six months later, in June 1779, fol-

lowing storm repairs, Ardent was quicklyre-commissioned under the command ofCaptain Phillip Boteler, sailing fromPlymouth to join Sir Charles Hardy in theEnglish Channel by August. NeitherBoteler nor the captain of Marlborough(74), in whose company Ardent was sail-ing, were aware that a French fleet had putto sea. Ardent encountered this enemy fleetonly two days after sailing into theChannel. After receiving correct replies tocoded signals, the two English capital shipsran down to meet the others they assumedwere also English. The fleet they encoun-tered was, in fact, a combined Franco-Spanish fleet, in possession of the RoyalNavy signal codebook that permitted thedeception; a correct response to Ardent’s“who are you?” signals.

With Ardent within range, the

French frigate Junon fired two broadsidesbefore raising the colors to reveal its trueallegiance. Three further French frigates,and the Spanish ship of the line, Princesa,joined the action shortly afterward. Inresponse, Ardent offered sporadic and inac-curate return fire before striking its colorsto the vastly superior enemy force. HMSMarlborough escaped unscathed and beat acourse back to England.

At his subsequent court martial,Captain Boteler blamed his failure toreturn fire on an inadequate supply of gun-powder for Ardent’s cannons, a statementstrongly denied by the ship’s gunner, whopresented evidence there was enough pow-der for fifty minutes of vigorous engage-ment. The court martial rejected Boteler ’sclaims, finding instead that the inexperi-ence of the crew was the principal cause ofArdent’s failure to respond to the attack.According to ship’s logs, in 1779 as much

Figure 5. Midships and fore chains. One can see the belfry and galley stack.

293NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

as eighty percent of Ardent’s crew com-prised pressed landsmen. Boteler was dis-missed from the Navy for his failureadequately to defend his ship.

Little is known of Ardent’s careerwhile flying the flag of Bourbon Francebefore the English re-captured the ship lessthan three years later, on April 12, 1782, atthe Battle of the Saintes, a large navalaction in the West Indies that took placeover four days, April 9 – 12, during theAmerican War of Independence. It was adecisive victory for the British fleet underAdmiral Sir George Rodney over the Frenchled by Admiral Comte de Grasse; the out-come forced the French and Spanish toabandon a planned invasion of Jamaica, aBritish stronghold. The battle is namedafter a small group of islands betweenGuadeloupe and Dominica in the WestIndies. Ironically, the French fleet was thevery same that, several months earlier, hadblockaded the British army, facilitating

George Washington’s victory overLieutenant General William Cornwallis atthe siege of Yorktown.

The following lines of poetry salut-ing the English victory at the Saintes areattributed to Charles Cornwallis, captain ofHMS Canada at the battle. He was thebrother of the same William Cornwalliswho surrendered to Washington atYorktown on October 19, 1781.

de Grasse in his flagship, crowded bynine,Strikes Ville de Paris colours o’er thebrine,HMS Barfleur, Hood’s flagship takesthe fame,De Grasse offered his sword, theAd’mril’s shame,Ardent, Glorieux, Hector soon fol-lowed suit,César blew up; a sad final salute,Thus four ships captured, an Ad’mril

Figure 6. Midships; anchors hauled and shipped, pinnace hoisted from the skids.

294 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

as well,Rodney’s fame and fortune made;tales to tell,His dogged tenacity in pursuit,Showered forth prize money,Vict’ry’sfair loot.

Following its recapture, Ardent wasrecommissioned under Captain RichardLucas. On August 28, 1783, the ship wasrenamed Tiger. It was sold out of service inJune, 1784.

The Model: The Best of Kit and Scratch

For my build of Ardent, I drew inspi-ration from visits to the National MaritimeMuseum in London and the MaritimeHistory Museum in Sweden during thesummer of 2013. Added to this was mydesire to challenge my modeling skills andknowledge by taking a readily available,good quality ship kit to a higher level;much higher. My work proceeded over aperiod of approximately eight months fromthe fall of 2013 to the spring of 2014. Iestimate that I put in approximately 900hours into my project.

My model of Ardent is a hybrid, aquite substantial kit-bash that began witha Caldercraft Agamemnon kit’s plank-on-bulkhead keelformer and bulkheads. Thekit is to 1:64 scale, my personal favorite.

I used the kit’s quite well-docu-mented full-scale plans to extensively mod-ify and, in most circumstances,scratch-build the balance of the ship’swood components, which included all theplanking, deck furniture, and bow andstern components. All non-visible skeletalwood—bulwarks framing, deck beams,hanging knees amidships, and the like—was basswood, while the principal hullplanking was crafted from Swiss pear that Ipurchased in precision-milled wood strips

and multiple-thickness sheets fromHobbyMill USA. Throughout the project Iworked in metric units of measurement,which I find easier.

For both aesthetic and practical rea-sons, I chose to employ thin walnut stripwood for the planking below the main waledown to the waterline. The painted blackwale itself was made from pear strips. Ifound it unnecessary to spile or employtedious bending techniques for the visibleplanked area of the hull. Neither stealersnor drop planks were required at eitherbow or stern, partially owing to the verythin (0.020-inch) walnut strips I used toform the severe tucks at the stem and atthe transom line. Beneath the ship’s fullwaterline-to-keel coppering is a single layerof basswood planking. Although the kitprovided for a customary European double-planked plank-on-bulkhead approach, Ifound this was not necessary. With properbeveling of bulkheads, adding a carved rab-bet and a nicely tapered bearding line, asingle run of basswood strips yielded asmooth, graceful shape to skin the ship’sstructure. The false keel, attached to thebottom of the basswood keelformer, wasmade from boxwood strip. HobbyMill USAalso supplied all the model’s boxwood, wal-nut and cherry.

On almost every plank-on-bulkheadmodel I have built, I have used balsa fillerblocks at the bow and stern. Ardent was noexception. Getting these added scratch-made filler pieces properly shaped andplaced contributed immensely to makingone of the most difficult aspects of plankingthe stem and stern plank tucks a little eas-ier to do with any plank-on-bulkhead -stylebuild.

I used the copper plates providedwith the kit to complete the hull’s exterior.The tedious and fiddly process took a fulltwo week’s work and required 2,300 of thethin copper plates. Once finished, I used acommercial-grade etching solution to

295NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

accelerate the aging of the shiny plateletsso they would present a desirable brown-hued patina that over time will continue tolook even more attractive. Following someexperimentation with my aging solution’sdilution proportions and after cleaning thecopper free of residual glue and finger oils, I

simply brushed the solution on with a ½-inch-wide brush and had plenty of wipingrags nearby.

Typically, I finish the woods on mymodels with a natural oil-based stain. Onmost components, I use it full-strength,right out of the can. This was the case for

Figure 8. The lower yard chain slings and platform swivel guns hauled up to the fighting tops.

Figure 7. Quarter and poop deck towards the stern. The ship’s wheel and binnacle was tucked under the foremost supportbeam for the poop deck, just ahead of the officer’s movable bulkheads.

the majority of the visible woods forArdent. However, I also used mixtures ofacrylic paints on some wood pieces where Ihad to match the colors of the paintedpewter or photo-etched brass decorativecomponents so they would better blendvisually against the tone of the adjacentpear planking. For example, on the stem, Icolored the pear headrails and carvings tomatch the lion figurehead and decorativetrailboard castings provided in the kit.

I used a multi-color, layered paintingtechnique to make both the cast pewterand brass pieces provided in a kit lookmore like wood carvings. This was espe-cially important in the stern area. I usedprimary paint colors, as well as metallicgold leaf color, very sparingly. Gold (andany hue of red) does tweak the retina, so-to-speak. I used my preferred dark-huedcrimson red acrylic for the inner bul-warks—gun deck and quarterdeck—theedges (only) of all gunport lids and portopenings, the background for King GeorgeIII’s cameo profile and, rather profusely, onthe officers’ pinnace.

I used a black acrylic (typically, twoor three coats) on the main wale and allother areas that were painted (flat) black oneighteenth-century warships: yards, tops,timbers, cap rails, lower stem area, and soon. I always use non-reflective flat acrylicpaints. Once dry, the black-painted woodwas given a thin coat of Minwax Wipe-Onpolyurethane finish to it a subtle sheen.

In keeping with my understandingof color painting standards for the eigh-teenth-century English capital warships, Ipainted all the outer planks of the gunports in black too. Warships of the eraloved to advertise their potency; the moregun ports spotted by a lookout or visible inthe watch officer ’s telescope, the better. Toscare-off pirates, merchant ships oftendeployed a canvas disguise that draped overthe sides of their ships upon which were

296 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

painted black false gun ports.A careful study of the ship’s plans

while gearing-up for the build led me to adecision to construct the model’s bulwarksfrom scratch; this allowed me to frame allthe ship’s gun ports more accurately whilealso yielding a thin, and scale-accurate,cross section to all the ship’s bulwarks. Ihave learned from past experience that thisarea of a kit build can be especially prob-lematic; bulwarks (especially those withsignificant tumblehome) can be challeng-ing to execute properly; it is frustrating torealize too late that a series of small butcumulative building errors in this criticalarea can result in a quite irregular sheerline from stem to stern. Rather than usinga paper template to locate and drill holesarbitrarily through planked sides thatwould have been built much too thickly, Ichose to build up the extensive bulwarkframing so that, when the interior andexterior planking was applied I had a quitereasonable replication of the actual full-sizebuilding practice, with sills, lintels and ver-ticals. As well as much better looking top-sides symmetry, a much stronger overallconstruction resulted from this worthwhileeffort.

This is a good time to mention that,mid-way through my build, I acquired anexcellent reproduction print of Ardent’soriginal 1761 plans from the NationalMaritime museum (to 1:48 scale and 84inches long). I used this document exten-sively to compare with the kit’s hull andsheer lines, and also for a multitude ofother hull construction details. This printwill be suitably framed and displayedbehind my completed model. This sameoriginal plan was used to build Ardent’s sixsiblings in later years—includingAgamemnon and even the razée frigateIndefatigible two decades after Ardent’slaunch in 1764.

297NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

At The Bow: Of Hawse Bucklers,

Gripes and Cant Washes

In the stem and beakhead area Iused various thicknesses of pear and box-wood for scratch-building the beakheaditself, all headrail, cheeks and hawse pieces,timbers, roundhouses, seats of ease, cat-heads, bumpkins and other decorativewood elements. The lion figurehead how-ever, was a pewter casting I purchased froman Italian manufacturer.

After doing some research in JamesLees’s and Brian Lavery’s tomes, I decidedto add hawse bucklers (basically, removablehole plugs) to the normally open anchorhawse holes. Because I was attempting toshow my model in an action-ready configu-ration, it made sense to secure the anchorsto frame timbers (with chains) and close up

Figure 9. The mass of rigging.

the large anchor cable openings at the bow.Hawse bucklers had a mechanism thatwould permit a sailor (inside or topside) topull a chain and quickly open them toready the anchor cables.

Additionally, I added a layer of pro-tection to the leading edge of the stem’scutwater; this was called a gripe. The gripewas made from a sheet of lead. It protectedthe stem from several sea-going hazards,especially during action when all mannerof debris could hit and foul the stem area.

Another important detail rarelyshown on contemporary models of this erais the cant wash. This angled piece, locat-ed just below the lowest cheeks on thestem, helped to minimize the intake of sea-water through the hawse holes and alsoenhanced the stem’s thrusting action inrough seas.

I took creative license and sourcedsome attractive, micro-thin green abalone(mother-of-pearl shell), cut small pieces,

298 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

and affixed them to the fronts and rears ofboth catheads and the headrail supporttimbers, starboard and port. I highly doubtthis embellishment was added in full-sizeshipbuilding practice. but I liked the resulton my model, particularly after seeing asimilar treatment on more than one his-toric model at the National MaritimeMuseum.

Stern Details

All the wood components of thestern were scratch built from pear: mainstern facings, transom, galleries, rails, anddecorative moldings. I used the kit’s galleryrailings, balustrades, columns, and finishpieces—virtually all of the kit’s decorativepewter pieces (which were quite nicelycast). In addition, I included a small hand-ful of decorative carvings (brass photo-etched items) from other kits that wereleftovers from previous builds.

The kit provided three sternlanterns but I decided to mount only two,purely for aesthetic reasons. My engineer-ing-oriented, historical accuracy sensibili-ties are continuously doing battle with myartistic ones. On balance, I lean toward artbecause, at the end of the day, I believethat, as a modeler—and not an engineer orcontract builder pitching a project to anAdmiralty Board—the properly propor-tioned, visually-attractive ship modelshould be an objet d’art.

In addition to rudder chains, I creat-ed emergency fall lines seized to the endsof the chains and tied them off to cleats onthe poop deck. It was a good thing to beable to quickly retrieve an unshipped rud-der, particularly during a battle!

Some may notice the canvas bootsurrounding the rudder where it passesthrough the transom. This is a very impor-tant detail that I have rarely seen on con-temporary sailing model warships. A lot ofwater passes across and around the stern,

not to mention what happens in a follow-ing sea. Without a well-sealed rudder boot,a ship’s captain would be taking non-stopbaths from seawater spouting up andthrough his stern cabin’s rudder trunk.

Last, but not least, there wasArdent’s badge. Most likely it would havebeen painted in 1764; I chose to affixphoto-etched brass letters in a creme colorthat matched that of the stern and quartergalleries mullions. I like the appearance ofraised typography, the precise letters cast-ing a slight shadow on the transom’s wood.

The Masts and Rigging

I crafted all masts and yards fromsquare stock boxwood. I followed the eigh-teenth-century conventions described byJames Lees and gleaned modeling tech-niques from David Antscherl’s excellentSwan series. I made all other wooden rig-ging components from pear (all channels,bees, bibs, fids, mastcaps, crosstrees,planked tops, hounds, mastheads).

I used a combination of kit-suppliedphoto-etched brass pieces and variousscratch built items to create the yard stir-rups, boom irons, straps, and platform railstanchions for all the tops. Although I usedthe kit’s deadeyes for all shrouds, I exclu-sively used pear blocks in several sizesfrom Syren Ship Model Company for allthe rigging, which was based on Lees’s rig-ging plans for third rate vessels. All of therope on the model also came from SyrenShip Models. I used ten different sizes forboth the standing and running rigging.

Concerning rope, I chose to usedark brown rather than black for all stand-ing rigging (this is particularly evident withthe wouldings on all the lower masts,including the bowsprit). I was fortunatethat this more accurate color rope wasmade available just a few weeks before Ineeded it. Created from three strands ofhigh-quality cotton linen, I found Syren

299NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

rope, in all sizes, consistently to be of highquality. Because this genuine rope is virtu-ally fuzz-free it was unnecessary to use abeeswax coating. The Syren rope made thevery fiddly detail work of making the morethan one hundred coiled rope hanks toposition on pins and other rigging belayingpoints much easier. The sheer volume ofrope visible on a square-rigged eighteenth-century warship means that their colorsand size fidelity are critical aspects for anaccurate portrayal of the real thing.

While working on Ardent’s rigging,my research revealed that the Royal Navyused lighter, more efficient blocks on theirships from the 1790s onward. This advan-tage reduced the total weight of the blocksand cordage, so their ships had consider-ably less top hamper than equivalentFrench vessels. Often overlooked, a numberof these small but significant riggingimprovements gave the Royal Navy a tech-nological advantage over their adversaries.

Figure 10. Hawse bucklers, the gripe, the cant wash and mother-of-pearl embellishments.

After more research regarding a war-ship’s preparations for action, I decided torig iron chain slings for the two lower yards(fore and mainmast). These chains provid-ed additional insurance against cripplingdamage in this sensitive area of the riggingfrom direct hits by an enemy’s gunners.The iron chain slings were either usedalone, or in combination with heavy rope,to support the weight of the spars.

The Cannon and the Fighting Tops:64 + 8 Still Equals 64!

Sixty-four turned brass cannon weresupplied in the kit and I finished themwith the chemical solution BiOx312 fromElectrochemical Products, Inc. A full soak-ing in this solution for only a few minutesimparts an attractive, low luster, darkishgrey pewter-like look; the result makesbrass appear aged after drying and burnish-

300 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

ing. A simple rag was used to rub each can-non after five to seven minutes of soaking.Nothing more was done to finish the can-non barrels. To my eye, results of thischemical aging technique look superior tosimply painting cast or turned cannon flatblack—or using the ubiquitous “Blacken-It” chemical.

In keeping with my decision todepict the ship ready for action whenever Icould, I mounted four turned brass swivelguns to each of the fore and main fightingtops. The mini-cannons were finishedusing the same BiOx312. The support stir-rups were fashioned from brass rod and flatstock.

Hammock Cranes For 500 – More “BiOx”

I used the kit’s supplied photo-etched brass—hammock cranes, quartergallery lights, ship’s wheel—and some ofthe pewter castings (mostly for the stern).Specifically, I also used the same BiOxsolution described above on all hammockcranes to match the antiqued look achievedon the brass cannon barrels.

Modelers have known about tullefabric—a finely knit synthetic fabric that isused in women’s fashion, especially bridalveils. I was fortunate to locate tulle in a

Figure 11. Midships quarterdeck close up.

301NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

ing. Asimple rag

Figure 12. The stern with French Bourbon ensign beneath the Union Jack.

302 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

light brown color and I used it to make theship’s extensive hammock netting. Tullewas also used to fabricate the safety nettingon the aft sides of the fighting tops and onthe forward headrails near the heads. In allinstances I tied off small attachment ropesto the hammock and safety nettings inaddition to using Allene’s fabric glue—astaple for securing rigging.

The Plinth and the Pegasus

To display my completed model Iwanted something that was, in itself, acomplementary work of art. Fancy, but notover-the-top. I am fortunate to have hadseveral opportunities to view numeroushistoric models in world-class maritimemuseums and paid close attention to thematerials and methods used to displaythem.

For HMS Ardent, I decided to designmy own plinth; a slightly elevated plat-

form. The plinth’s complex routed profilewas made from six-quarter cherry. Thebaseboard within the cherry rails is half-inch Baltic birch plywood covered with aglossy paper print of Aegean marble. I cre-ated a high-resolution digital photographicfile of real marble and generated a docu-ment large enough to cover the entire base-board. By substituting a mounted printover the plywood base for the real thing,the large baseboard was a tiny fraction ofthe weight had I employed genuine marble(not to mention a small fraction of thecost!). The cherry rails were stained natu-ral and then given three coats of semi-glossMinWax Wipe-On polyurethane finish.The “French provincial profiled” cherryrails had their inner perimeter edges insetwith 1/16-inch-thick polished brass. Thiswas done to achieve a visual accent to thedarker marble base piece and separate itslightly from the lighter cherry rails.

Four serpent-tailed Pegasus cast

Figure 13. You can judge a ship by its boats. Here, the officers’ 32-foot pinnace is hauled up. A protective web of overheadrope netting was spread across the skids to protect the gun crews from falling overhead objects—and to hinder potentialenemy boarding actions. Sharp weapons—like cutlasses and pikes—were at the ready and could thrust up through the netting.

303NAUTICAL RESEARCH JOURNAL

Figure 14. The bow of the National Maritime Museum print from the 1761 Ardent-class original plans. Seven 64-gun thirdrates in total were built to these plans.

304 Vol. 59, No 4 WINTER 2014

brass pedestals support the model. Iacquired these from a modeling colleagueand fashioned the keel support mountingblocks below them. I believe thesepedestals still can be purchased fromEuropean model ship resellers. Oncesecured to Ardent’s Aegean marble base-board, the equine pedestals hold the modelquite securely.

Flags: A Tricolor Becomes a Bourbon Surmounted

by the Union Jack.

Early on in my model’s “life,” I haddecided to show it recaptured by theEnglish as a result of the Battle of theSaintes, with the Union Jack flying proud-ly above the French Tricolor. Only afterposting some preliminary photographs ofmy Ardent on the Internet forum, ModelShip World, did I discover that I had hoist-ed the wrong French flag at the stern. Anexpatriate Englishman living in Swedenpointed out to me, via the forum, that thecorrect French naval ensign of 1782 wouldhave been a variation of the plain vanilla-white, fleur de Lis-checkered Bourbon flagof Louis XVI. I immediately went back tothe Internet for flag research and, subse-quently, to my computer drawing board. Iprinted out the correct French flag (onpaper) and crafted its folds to replace theNapoleon-era tricolor that fluttered overthe nation’s ships several years later, fol-lowing the French Revolution.

C’est La Guerre!

AcknowledgementsCaldercraftAgamemnon kit, from the manufacturer ’s“Nelson’s Navy” range.

Model Ship World Forum www.modelship-world.com

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich,England

Swedish Maritime Museum (Sjøhistoriskamuseet) Stockholm, Sweden

SourcesAntscherl, David, Rigging A Sixth Rate

Sloop of 1767-1780. (Florence, Oregon:

SeaWatchBooks, 2010).

Lavery, Brain, The Arming & Fitting ofEnglish Ships of War 1600-1815.(Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1987).

——-Nelson’s Navy. (Annapolis: NavalInstitute Press, 1989).

——-Empire of The Seas. (London: ConwayMaritime Press, 2009).

James Lees, The Masting & Rigging ofEnglish Ships of War, 1625-1860.(Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1984).

Darcy Lever, Darcy, The Young SeaOfficer’s Sheet Anchor. (New York: DoverPublications, 1998).

Rodgers, N.A.M., Command of the Ocean:A Naval History of Britain 1649-1815.(New York: W.W. Norton & Company,2006).

Winfield, Rif, British Warships in the Age ofSail, 1714-1792 Design, Construction,Careers & Fates. (Barnsley: SeaforthPublishing, 2005).

Electrochemical Products, Inc.Industrial Chemicals Manufacturerwww.epi.com

HobbyMillCustom Wood Millingwww.hobbymillusa.com

Syren Ship Model Company