Years ago, I bought a Revell 1/96 scale Constitution plastic kit. This box lay on the floor of a closet forgotten and gathering dust. Recently, I visited a Salvation Army Thrift Store looking for a cheap lamp my wife wanted. Instead, I found another Constitution kit opened but unwanted. For a bargen price of $5, I bought this kit. I do not want to construct two Constitutions. What alternative model can be made ? Researching the book, The American Sailing Navy, by Howard I. Chapelle, a foldout plan of the USS Constitution, President and United States were proposed as 44 gun frigates by the Philadelphia shipwright, Joshua Humphreys. These drawings show only the profiles, but not the stern, or the figure head of these three frigates. Were the prows decorated as fiddle heads like the Constitution ? What did the transoms of the President and the United States look like ? Perhaps professor, J. Tilley, can help me with this question. Any and all help will be appreciated.
In an old Kalmbach Book written by Les Wilkins called How to Build Plastic Ship Models, there is a step-by-step guide for converting the 1/96 scale USS Constitution into USS President. It gets into the scrollwork at the bow and stern as well as the major differences in color scheme. Another option is to build the kit as HMS President, if you can find detail pictures. The USS President was captured in January, 1815 and was condemned as being beyond economic repair by the British captors. However, the British built their HMS President using the exact hull lines of the American ship. I hope this helps!
Each ship had its own unique figurehead originally. The written descriptions of those figureheads tells us this and we know from some early artwork that the Constitution did indeed have the figurehead that was described for it. It was a classical Hercules figure. It is very likely that the other 44s also had their own distinct figures.
What was done with them later is unclear, but they probably all eventually did away with the figureheads and had the simple scroll work of some type. We know this happened with Constitution and President. It was also likely that it happened with the United States as well. To say that all of them had the same treatment is waaay too far to go. Similar probably, but probably not exactly the same.
We would need to see a lot of research on that HMS President before saying that she was built to the same lines as the American frigate. That is going a little far with the present evidence. Perhaps after a detailed examination of the two lines drawings it might be possible to say how closely the British copied her, but on the face of it, there is little evidence to say for sure what they did.
Although I would agree with Russ39 that far more research needs to be done concerning the HMS President, everything I’ve seen concerning her states explicitly that the British did copy the lines exactly from the USS President before scrapping her. That being said, I have seen no primary source material at all, only secondary sources both on line and in books. I would love to come across paintings of the “HMS” version, as well as any plans. Anyway, good luck with whatever project you choose to do! I recommend the Wilkins book for any conversion to USS President; it is a good starting point.
By the way, Russ39, if you have specific information about the HMS President of 1819, would you consider sharing it? I am considering this conversion myself and have been searching for as much information that I can get. I really would appreciate it very much! Thanks!
I have not seen any primary source research on that ship, but I would imagine that the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich would be the place to ask those questions. They should have the plans, correspondence, contracts etc for that ship. If not all of that, at least some of it. In any event, they are the ones to ask. It would be interesting to see and examine the plans for the two ships. With a CAD program, a very exacting comparison might be done that would shed a lot of light on this question.
I have amassed a great deal of research on the Constitution, though. My main interest is in her early years, from 1798-1815. I have been researching her, on and off, for about 25 years now.
The smaller Revell Constitution has molded-on gunport lids that are split into upper and lower halves, with the guns protruding when they are closed. The kit also has the Andrew Jackson figurehead, meaning that this configuration is later in the mid-1800’s. Did the Constitution ever really carry this configuration with her gunport lids?
The ship’s log first mentions the split gun port lids in August 1803. This would be just as she was getting ready to leave Boston for the Mediterranean. There is nothing there to say that the guns protruded through the ports when closed, though. The log says they made “iron work for securing the half ports over the guns…” That might say something useful, but it is ambiguous at best. I’ll read a little further when I get a chance and let you know what I find.
My thought would be that they would have run the guns in behind the port lids and frapped up the guns as had been the practice for years before that. That’s just my two cents worth, though.
The Jackson figurehead was installed in April 1834. It was beheaded in a political protest not long afterward. Tyrone Martin’s A Most Fortunate Ship covers the Jackson figurehead episode very well. His is the most recent and best overall history of the ship. He has researched her for over 30 years and done some very sound historical research.
Thank you for the insight! I thought that the gunport lid arrangement did not match the figurehead. It might be an interesting conversion then to build that kit as an early Constitution, changing the AJ figurehead into something resembling the Hercules one. If I were to do so, I suppose I would have to also change the spar deck armament from carronades (also molded onto the plastic deck) with wheeled cannon. I would be interested too hear your ideas! Thanks!
I do not know if the split gunport covers were there with the Jackson figurehead or not. I never said the two features did not go together. I merely said that the first time we see the split covers mentioned is in 1803 and the Jackson figurehead went on in 1834. I do not know if she still had the split gunport covers in 1834 but she mght have.
The question of whether the split gunport covers were made so that the guns poked out when they were closed is another question as well.
There was a small limited print publication, I forget the title and author at this time but I believe it was publshed in the 70’s perhaps, that had drawings taken from a painting from the very early 1800’s of the Constitution and her decorations and coloring were quite different from what we’ve become accustomed to. Her stern galleries were much more decorative than what the 1/96th Revell kit and the Hull crew model suggest. The basic structures are the same but the decorations are much more elaborate. They were very interesting.
That publication was by William Bass who did the microphotographic survey of the 1803 water color by Michele Felice Corne’. Corne’ did a few other paitings of the Constitution at other times as well.
The other very interesting painting was of her leading an attack on the forts at Tripoli in 1805. This painting showed her stern. The 1803 and 1805 paintings were studied to reveal the full extent of her original decorations. Bass did drawings of these in his book. The book is no longer in print, but was originally published in 1980. The title was Constitution Second Phase 1802-1807, I think. Mine is packed away at the moment, but I’ll dig it out when I can and confirm that title.
Russ39, that is the information I was trying to remember. I don’t recall who but someone sent me scans of those pages and they are quite remarkable in their complexity and ornimentation. I tried to aquire that book a while back but it is quite rare and was evidently published for distribution to a small audience of scholars who’s interest was in the subject. I believe it was self published too owing for the small circulation. I believe it also had term “super frigate” in the title too.
It does have the term “super frigate” in the title. In any event, it is impossible to get copies unless through interlibrary loan, but even then, it would be VERY difficult I suspect since there are so few copies out there.
It was not self published. There was a publishing name on the book. The author did not publish it himself, though.
It would be next to impossible to convert that Revell kit into that earliest version of the ship since it would require a lot of physical alterations to that plastic hull. I won’t say its not possible, but I could not imagione someone trying it. It would be easier to scratch build the hull.
The book is Constitution, Super Frigate of Many Faces, Second Phase 1802-07 by William and Ethel Bass, published by Shipresearch, Melbourne Florida, 1981. There is a note to the effect that this was to be one of a series of monographs on the ship, but this appears to be the only one published. One is currently shown available on ABE for $80.00.
I am in the process of converting a 1/96 Revell kit to the 1804 version as shown in the book. It is a challenging, but by no means impossible conversion. Coincidently, I was in Boston on vacation last week and saw the Corne painting in the museum adjacent to the ship. I was quite surprised at how small the painting is.
I’ve never heard of a publisher called “Shipresearch.” I rather suspect it may have been located in Mr. and Mrs. Bass’s house.
I think I remember looking through this book in the library at the Mariners’ Museum when I worked there (1980-1983). I don’t recall much about it other than my thinking that it demonstrated a considerable amount of research and enthusiasm but a certain lack of professionalism. I remember it (beward my notorious memory) as a relatively slim paperback in landscape format. I believe Commander Martin wrote the introduction.
I think Steves is right: this was supposed to be one in a series of volumes, but the others never appeared. That’s a shame; this had the potential to be the source that the Anatomy of the Ship book tried - and in several important respects failed - to be. (I continue to hope the Anatomy volume will appear in a revised, corrected edition - but no sign of that so far.)
When I was working at the MM the library was proud of the fact that it didn’t participate in the Inter-Library Loan Service. (Some people pick odd things to be proud of.) Maybe that policy has changed since then, but I doubt it. I suspect library copies of that book are as rare as hen’s teeth.
Ahhh yes…I remember now Russ39. Thanks. If the painting that the drawings were created from was so small…at least the image of the Constitution, he sure packed a lot of detail into his drawings. It is a shame those drawings are in such an obscure and hidden place. I would imagine most folks that have a deep interest in the ship have no idea that the book even exists. I only happened to come across the knowlege of it recently quite by accident and you were so kind to answer back. While I’m not as studied as yourself or jtilley on the subject I have had an on going interest in the ship and its history for many years. It seems the subject is like the proverbial peeling of the onion, removing the layers revealing new information over time.
It may very well be that Bass published it himself. In any event, it was not published by any recognized publishing house and it certainly does not rise to the level of any truly competent historical research. However, it has value beyond that and it is better than many things I have seen written about the Constitution.
The main thing that can be safely taken from the work is the detail of the ship’s outboard appearance in the period 1803-1805. The paintings show those details well enough and Bass’s drawings are good in that respect.
I too got a 1/96 Constitution at the Salvation Army Thrift Store. $3.50 and it included a box of Model Masters paint.
Also got a Cutty Sark for $5.
Same dilema, what to do with multiple kits? I am experimenting with the various colors the ship supposedly had during its early career, also looking at kitbashing a kit to match the plans of the ship at its commisioning per Chapelle’s drawings.
I have a couple of Cutty Sarks. I plan on building one as it may have been prior to 1882, and the other one as the Ferriera under the Portugues flag at about 1921. The life spans of the Cutty Sark and USS Constitution provide many schemes for modeling.
I have been working on them for about three years now with very little progress. At this point I have a hull for the Ferriera and a couple of bases to mount the ships on.
