This article describes the nationalization of Danish warship design and construction in the 1690s, and profiles the first fifty major Danish waships built at the Holmen shipyard in Copenhagen.
af Eric Nielsen
The fifty Danish-Norwegian warships listed in this article’s ship list only constitute a small portion of the total number of warships which served in the Danish-Norwegian navy between 1692 and 1744. However, most Danish ships-of-the-line – i.e., Denmark’s “capital ships” – built for the Danish-Norwegian navy between 1692 and 1744, are included in this list.
This article’s warship list, beginning with the date Danish naval shipbuilding and design became “nationalized,” provides insights into the nature of indigenous Danish warship design and construction, of major Danish-Norwegian warships, during this formative and evolutionary period in Danish naval history.
The period covered by this article pertains to warships which formed the strength of the navy of the dual Kingdom of Denmark-Norway. However, for ease of reading, these warships are typically referred to simply as “Danish,” although it must be recognized that a significant portion of the Danish-Norwegian navy’s personnel – and budget revenue – was Norwegian.
Holmen: Gammelholm and Nyholm
Holmen, the Danish-Norwegian navy’s naval yard and main naval base of the Danish-Norwegian fleet, located in the Danish capital of Copenhagen, consists of two parts, the original dockyard, or Gammelholm, and a new part of Copenhagen harbor that was filled in to reclaim it from the sea – as the Dutch have done during much of their history – this new part of the Holmen naval base is called Nyholm.
Danish-Norwegian warships were built at both locations, Gammelholm and Nyholm, during the 1692-1744 period covered in this article. Gammelholm was gradually phased out and finally closed as a naval yard in the last part of the 19th Century. However, in the period covered by this article, Gammelholm was still a primary location for much of Denmark’s naval construction.
When possible, the individual Danish-Norwegian warship entries, in the warship list below, note whether an individual warship was built at Gammelholm, as opposed to Nyholm.
Holmen and Denmark’s Nationalization of Danish Warship Design and Construction
Around 1690, a new era in Danish naval history occurred when Danish naval shipbuilding was “nationalized,” by Denmark’s implementation of a policy of employing only Danish nationals as the Danish navy’s naval architects, to design and construct Denmark’s future warships, in preference to foreigners who previously predominated in this role.
Roughly contemporaneous with Denmark’s nationalization of Danish warship design and construction, Denmark’s naval administration also adopted a policy of utilizing ships plans, specifically drafted for the purpose, to construct Danish warships. Aspects of this incipient, evolutionary development can be seen in the absence of certain ships’ data, including dimensions and weight calculations, in the ship data entries of some of the earliest ships in this article’s ship list for 1692-1744.
Nyholm and the DANNEBROG
Chronologically, Denmark’s new policy of employing Danish nationals as Denmark’s naval architects coincided with Denmark’s establishment of the new Danish naval dockyard at Nyholm. Therefore, the historic first product of the new Nyholm naval dockyard, the aptly-named (in terms of Denmark’s national symbolism) Danish battleship DANNEBROG, is emblematic of this new era in the history of nationalized Danish warship construction.
Nyholm’s DANNEBROG subsequently became a celebrated historic ship of far greater distinction, in the minds of Danish naval historians, than because of her status as the first warship constructed at Nyholm. This greater historic distinction is due to the DANNEBROG’s conspicuously heroic and decisive role in the naval action which resulted in her own destruction, as well as in the resultant deliverance of the Danish-Norwegian fleet, during the second Battle of Køge Bay, on October 4, 1710.
The DANNEBROG’s self-sacrificial stand in the second Battle of Køge Bay is one of the greatest symbols, and one of the most outstanding models of exemplary behavior in combat, in Danish naval history.
“Construction Numbers” – Hull Numbers
This article’s data on the earliest Danish-Norwegian warships built at Holmen’s shipyard is compiled from several sources noted in this article’s bibliography. However, the format of this article’s presentation is modeled on O. E. Holst’s article entitled “En Kort Oversigt Over Skibe Byggede Paa Orlosvæftet Efter 1692,” in TIDSSKRIFT FOR SØVÆSEN (February, 1923).
The distinguishing feature of O. E. Holst’s presentation is that the Danish-Norwegian warships listed in his article are accorded shipyard “construction numbers,” a presentation format which is followed in this article’s ship list detailed below. O. E. Holst’s “construction numbers” presumably constitute Holmen’s own official shipyard construction number designation which Holmen officially assigned to each major warship constructed at Holmen, i.e., what some shipyards call a “hull number.”
O. E. Holst’s shipyard “construction numbers,” are primarily applicable only to Danish ships-of-the-line, as well as to six frigates and one brigantine, but not to most smaller Danish warships.
O. E. Holst’s shipyard “construction numbers” raise a puzzling question because, during the period covered by this article, the Danish navy acquired a considerable number of warships of types smaller than a frigate, such as, for example, snows, hookers, yachts and galleys, some or many of which were presumably built at Holmen. However, none of these smaller Danish warships seem to have been assigned “construction numbers.”
If it is true that smaller Danish warships were also built in Denmark’s navy yard at Holmen, as many presumably were, then the Danish naval administration does not appear to have also assigned Holmen shipyard “construction numbers” to these smaller Danish warships, in contrast to the case of the larger Danish warships.
Regardless of whether Holmen also assigned dockyard “construction numbers” to smaller Danish warships constructed there, there is great instructive value in this article’s warship list for 1692-1744, which covers most of the major Danish warships – i.e., the principal components of the Danish fleet – built during this formative period in the history of Holmen naval dockyard.
Minor Discrepancies in Ships’ Dimensions, and in Spellings of Ships’ Names
In the warship list provided below, source material sometimes indicated slightly conflicting dimensions for an occasional Danish-Norwegian warship. Therefore, a selection sometimes had to be made between conflicting measurements, when such a conflict was found, for presentation in the warship list below.
Another discrepancy occasionally noticed in the source material is that the spelling of the same Danish-Norwegian warship’s name sometimes differs in different sources – again, a choice had to be made, for presentation in the warship list below.
Ship List Data Entries re Ships’ Armament
The armament data entries of some of the earlier Danish warships in this article’s ship list, instead of noting just one number for the aggregate total of cannon carried, notes a range of cannon carried, indicating that a particular warship’s armament varied during her naval career.
Variations in a warship’s armament during her service life was particularly prevalent in the case of 17th Century warships. However, as warship design plans and associated armament establishments of Danish warships became more administratively formalized, a warship’s total armament became fixed at a specific number of guns, as dictated by a warship’s architectural design.
Regarding the Danish-Norwegian navy’s establishment of a fixed number of guns in a specified battery for a specific warship design, Danish captains – unlike their British counterparts – do not appear to have been given discretion as to how their “commands” were armed. This at least became the case in the latter part of the 18th Century. In contrast, a British captain had the ability to vary the total number of guns their warships carried, to the frequent detriment of their warship’s sailing qualities.
Strictly adhering to a fixed armament establishment for specific warships might seem to be an example of mindless and unimaginative bureaucratic rigidity. However, strict adherence to a warship’s designed armament establishment was in fact a sound and frequently ignored practice. Ignoring a warship’s armament establishment, by overloading a warship’s hull with added weaponry to an extent to which a warship was not designed to carry, impaired the structural integrity and longevity of the warship’s hull as well as its sailing qualities.
Two Caveats Re Danish Weights and Measures
Two caveats are noted regarding two of the categories of data entries that appear in all of the entries regarding individual warship data specifications noted in this article’s warship list:
(1). The dimensions of all the Danish-Norwegian warships are given in Danish feet and inches. During the period of time covered by this article’s ship list, Danish units of measurement, including the length of Danish feet and inches, differed slightly from those of England.
(2). The data entry for each warship’s size is labeled as “Weight,” because the Danish unit of measurement, a “læst,” was an old Scandinavian measurement of weight and internal volume, as in the British “burthen” ton. Thus, this “weight” was not representative of a ship’s “displacement,” as became the case in Danish naval usage beginning in the late 19th Century. A “læst” was roughly equivalent to two tons burthen, although at a few different points in Danish history the method of calculating or measuring a “læst” slightly varied.
Method of Calculating a Danish Warship’s Dimensions in the 1690s
In addition to the foregoing observations regarding units of Danish weights and measures, it is noted that, at least from the year 1690, Danish-Norwegian warships’ hull dimensions were in theory calculated as follows:
(1). A Danish warship’s hull length is the maximum distance from the fore side of the stem to the after side of the sternpost;
(2). The beam was measured inside of a ship’s hull planking; and
(3). The hull’s depth or draft was the distance from the upper side of the keel to the level of upper side of the lower-deck beams at the side of the hull, or, if a warship had an orlop deck, the distance was taken from the upper side of the keel to the beams of the orlop deck.
It’s not known if the foregoing methods of calculating the dimensions of a Danish warship’s hull were employed throughout the period covered by this article’s warship list, or was varied in any manner.
The Great Northern War, 1709-1720
The first twenty-two Danish-Norwegian warships in this article’s warship list participated in Danish-Norwegian naval operations during the Great Northern War of 1709-1720.
Most Danish warships which participated in the Great Northern War achieved no great distinction during the War’s naval operations. Therefore, the war record of most of the warships in this article’s warship list, that participated in the Great Northern War, is not worthy of note in these warships’ individual data entries, in their data profiles presented below.
“Den Lange Fredsperiode.”
The Great Northern War was followed by what Danish historians call “den lange fredsperiode,” or “the long period of peace,” from 1720 to 1800, a relatively uneventful period for Danish warships.
In default of interesting operational or service details of the warships listed in the warship list presented below, the data entries for most of the warships listed in this article focus primarily on aspects of these warships’ design and construction.
Construction Rate
During the 53 year period covered by this article’s warship list appearing below, a major, 11-year hiatus occurred in the building of major Danish-Norwegian warships. During this period, from 1710 to 1721, no new Danish warships were laid down at Holmen which would have been assigned Holmen “Construction Numbers.”
Ironically, this 11-year hiatus in major warship construction at Holmen occurred entirely through the war years of the Great Northern War of 1709 to1720, when demand for new warship construction would presumably have been the greatest.
The 11-year hiatus in major Danish naval construction during the 1710-1720 war years was possibly due to the fact that Denmark’s naval budget during this period was entirely consumed with the cost of manning and supplying Denmark’s considerable war fleet, and that Denmark’s dockyard resources were correspondingly entirely preoccupied with simply maintaining existing Danish warships in operational condition. Furthermore, as the Great Northern War was a war between Baltic powers that correspondingly affected Baltic trade, Denmark’s access to Baltic naval timber, or other commodities needed for naval construction, may also have been disrupted.
Aside from the Danish navy’s presumably constricted wartime budget, and dockyard resources, during the 1709-1720 war years, the Danish navy suffered no considerable war losses during the Great Northern War which would have needed urgent replacement in order for Denmark to maintain a sufficient ratio of naval strength against Sweden’s naval forces. Therefore, the absence of considerable Danish warship losses, which would have necessitated significant new naval construction, may be another explanation why no major naval construction took place at Holmen from 1710 to 1721.
In addition to the 11 year hiatus in major Danish naval construction from 1710 to 1721, during the Great Northern War, during which no major Danish warships were built, no major Danish warships were completed – as opposed to being laid down – in 1698, 1700, 1702, 1723, 1724, 1726, 1728, 1729, 1737, and 1738 – a further aggregate of 10 years.
During the remaining 32 years covered by this article, the 50 Danish warships detailed in the ship list were completed at a rate of between 1 to 2 ships per year, with 3 being completed in 1731, 1742, and 1744, respectively.
Denmark’s Earliest Naval Architects
The Danish naval architects noted in the data entries of individual Danish warships in this article’s warship list, during this formative period in Denmark’s newly nationalized warship design and construction, are in some respects more interesting to study than the construction plans of the individual warships they designed and built.
The naval architect responsible for the design of each listed warship is identified in the warship’s data entry. These naval architects’ professional attributes regarding their design output are also noted, if known. Unfortunately, little information about these individual Danish naval architects is available in English.
The Danish naval architects noted in this article are typically not specifically identified as “naval architects” in Danish naval literature. Indeed, these naval architects’ official titles in the Danish navy usually emphasize their role in constructing rather than in designing Danish warships, e.g., with titles such as “Master Builder” or “Constructor.”
Notwithstanding their official titles as “Master Builder” or as “Constructor,” this article focuses on the design output of the Danish naval architects noted or discussed, rather than on their role in the construction of the Danish warships they designed.
Olaus Judichær and Danish Warship Decoration
The Danish naval architect Olaus Judichær is the earliest of the Danish naval architects noted in this article. Olaus Judichær also had considerable longevity in office as the Danish navy’s Master Shipbuilder, a post he occupied from 1692 to 1729, or a period of 37 years.
Despite Olaus Judichær’s longevity as the Danish navy’s Master Builder, he is only credited with designing 11 Danish battleships and 2 frigates, a seemingly small number, particularly in view of the fact Judichær’s tenure extended through the Great Northern War.
Olaus Judichær is particularly memorable today for the richly colored and detailed design plans he produced for the earliest of the Danish warships contained in the warship list presented below, which includes some of the most beautifully decorated warships in Danish naval history.
Judichær is the only Danish naval architect to have produced colored design plans, including plans of warships’ decorative schemes, of the Danish warships he designed and built. These design plans pertain not only to a warship’s stern carvings and figurehead, but often the color scheme employed in painting either these carvings or the warship’s hull.
Judichær’s colored design plans are invaluable today because they provide a compelling impression of the overall visual appearance of the Danish warships Judichær designed. This detailed decorative record is particularly important because of the nearly total, and in view of the size of the Danish-Norwegian navy, incomprehensible, absence of any other artistic portraits – e.g., paintings or lithographs – of Danish warships of the period.
Knowledge and appreciation of the decorative schemes employed on Danish warships during the age of sail is historically important because Danish warship decoration had distinctive national attributes and character that were not only peculiarly Danish, but were also aesthetically very attractive.
Knud Benstrup and the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS
Knud Benstrup is another interesting, skillful, and prolific Danish naval architect who is responsible for the design of a number of some of the more important of the Danish warships in this article’s ship list.
Compared to his predecessor in the Danish navy’s design work, Olaus Judichær, Knud Benstrup’s tenure as the Danish navy’s Chief Master Builder was relatively short, only six years, from 1731-1736. Yet, during this brief period, Benstrup is credited with designing the considerable total of 15 battleships and one frigate.
Benstrup is one of the key and, some scholars believe, one of the more capable of the Danish naval architects of this period. Unfortunately, virtually no information and no analysis is available in English to indicate the rationale for this scholarly judgment as to Benstrup’s professional capabilities or attributes, or of the specific design features of the warships he constructed which exemplify aspects of Benstrup’s special designing skills.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, a particularly notorious and historically interesting scandal erupted over an isolated element – i.e., the depth of the warship’s draft – of Benstrup’s design of the Danish fleet flagship CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS – i.e., “Construction No. 34″ in the warship list that appears later in this article.
The supposed fault with the depth of the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’ draft was apparently discovered not when the fleet flagship was designed, that is, when her proposed construction plans were approved and thus authorized for the construction of the actual ships, but only after CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS was built. As a result of what may have been an unjust and biased bureaucratic handling of the investigation into this supposed flaw, Benstrup was held accountable, was dismissed from his post, and his valuable services as a naval architect were thus lost to the Danish navy.
The depth of the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’s greatest draft (i.e., her aftermost draft), as built, was 21′ 8″. By comparison, the deepest draft of CHRISTIAN SEXTUS’s predecessor as fleet flagship, i.e., FREDERICUS QUARTUS of 1699, was 22′ 6″, or nearly a foot deeper than that of CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS. The Danish ship-of-the-line DRONNING LOUISA of 1695 had the same maximum draft as did the FREDERICUS QUARTUS, i.e., 22′ 6”. Therefore, in view of the deeper drafts of these two earlier Danish-Norwegian fleet flagships, one wonders why such a major uproar arose over the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’s shallower draft in comparison to these two earlier Danish battleships.
After the major bureaucratic flap over the depth of the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’s draft, no other Danish warship constructed during the 18th Century had a draft that exceeded 21′ – the sole exception being Denmark’s last fleet flagship built in the 18th Century, CHRISTIAN DEN SVENDE of 1767.
The irony in the scandal over the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’s draft of 21′ 8″ is that absolutely all of the Danish warships in the warship list provided below, with the exception of the FREDERICUS QUARTUS and the DRONNING LOUISA as noted above, had a maximum draft of 20′ or less. Therefore, Denmark’s fleet flagships, which were intended to lead all other Danish ships-of-the-line in fleet action, had a draft that was nearly three feet greater that all the other Danish battleships in the fleet – except for the two noted above.
Therefore, the Danish fleet flagships were prevented, by their substantially greater drafts, from leading all the rest of the Danish fleet’s battleships into waters where the Danish fleet flagship’s draft prevented her from going – a particularly unusual situation where the Danish fleet flagship’s most likely theater of operations was the Baltic, including the shoal nature of Denmark’s own territorial waters.
What is even more ironic about the issue of the draft of the Danish fleet flagships is that the drafts of Danish warships was pivotal in the most important fleet victory ever achieved by the Danish navy, i.e., the first battle of Køge Bay, in 1676. At the Battle of Køge Bay, the Danish admiral Niels Juel succeeded in forcing the Swedish fleet into shoal waters along the Danish coast, where one of the Swedish battleships became grounded, thus setting in train a series of events that ultimately culminated in Juel’s great victory.
The use of their country’s shoal waters was a tactic the Dutch pursued throughout the age of sail, was a principal feature of Dutch tactical doctrine, and was therefore a tactic Niels Juel presumably learned from the Dutch during Niels Juel’s years of apprenticeship with the Dutch navy. In regard to these Dutch naval tactics, Dutch warships were traditionally constructed with hulls of a shallower draft than those of other countries.
The draft of Niels Juel’s flagship at the first Battle of Køge Bay, the CHISTIANUS QUNTUS of 1665 (originally the PRINDS CHRISTIAN), was only 13′ 9″ – i.e., nearly ten feet less than that of Benstrup’s CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS! Could Niels Juel have ever achieved his victory in the Battle of Køge Bay, by causing the forced grounding of a portion of the Swedish fleet in Denmark’s shoal territorial waters, if the draft of Niels Juel’s flagship, the CHRISTIANUS QUINTUS, had been significantly greater than it was?
These observations on the tactics involved in the first Battle of Køge Bay illustrate the issue of the tactical limitations imposed by the depth of the drafts of Danish ships-of-the-line, and particularly the Danish fleet flagship, with particular reference to the flap over the draft of Benstrup’s CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS.
The Arbitrary Cut-Off Date for this Article’s Warship List
There is no known or obvious reason why the dockyard “construction numbers” in the ship list below, of major Danish warships built at Holmen, abruptly ends in the year 1744, except that the last “construction number” in this “series” is the round, even figure of 50.
Danish warships during the age of sail are sometimes conveniently categorized by the fact that their date of building fell within a particular Danish king’s reign – an effective and illuminating method of categorization. However, the last reigning Danish monarch during the 1692-1744 period covered by this article’s warship list, Christian VI, did not die until 1746, i.e., two years after the last warship built in the initial series of Holmen’s “Construction Numbers.”
In retrospect, at the time Holmen’s first series of dockyard “construction numbers” ended in 1744, Danish naval administrators were presumably not thinking about what particular method which future Danish naval historians, a century later, would utilize to categorize the periods of construction of Danish warships – e.g., by a Danish king’s reign, or by Holmen “Construction Numbers,” or by some other method.
It seems probable that when the first series of dockyard “construction numbers” of major warships built at Holmen reached the arbitrary but even figure of “50” in 1744, this first series of dockyard “construction numbers” was administratively terminated and a new series was instituted – although, if this supposition is correct, it’s not known what constituted the basis of the justification of this administrative action in terminating Holmen’s original “construction number” series.
The Warship List
| Construct. No. 1 | |
| Name: | DANNEBROG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Henrik Spann |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 82-94 cannon – largest caliber, 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 42′ 6″ Draft – 17′ 3″ |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1692; Launched – October 6, 1692 |
| Crew: | 680 |
| Out of Service: | October 6, 1710 |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | DANNEBROG is notable as being not only the first warship built at Nyholm, but also as the second largest warship built for the Danish navy during the 17th century, being second only in size to the huge Danish fleet flagship FREDERICUS QUARTUS built seven years after the DANNEBROG, in 1699.Although the battleship which was Danish-Norwegian fleet flagship at the time the DANNEBROG was built – i.e., the second CHRISTIANUS QUINTUS, built in 1683 – mounted more cannon than did the DANNEBROG, the DANNEBROG’s hull dimensions were larger, being four feet longer and one and a half feet wider at the DANNEBROG’s extreme beam, while her draft was only two inches shallower than that of the CHRISTIANUS QUINTUS.Admiral Henrik Spann, designer of the DANNEBROG, was put in charge of shipbuilding at Holmen in 1690, and served in this capacity, as “Chef” of the Holmen shipyard, until 1694. Henrik Spann is credited with designing 2 ships-of-the-line and 3 frigates for the Danish navy; three of these five warships are included in the warship list appearing later in this article.
The DANNEBROG was destroyed in action on October 4, 1710, during the second Battle of Køge Bay, in the Great Northern War, by an explosion of her magazine as a result of combat damage caused while resisting an attack by the entire Swedish fleet. In terms of action in major naval combat operations, the DANNEBROG achieved the greatest distinction in combat of any of the warships included in this article’s warship list. Therefore, the details of DANNEBROG’s heroic stand will be described here. On October 4, 1710, a large Swedish battlefleet of 21 battleships attacked an even larger Danish fleet of 26 battleships lying at anchor in Køge Bay. Due to an apparent lack of vigilance, and having failed either to take appropriate defensive precautions or to timely react to the initial sighting of the Swedish fleet, the Danish fleet was unprepared to meet the Swedish onslaught, which descended rapidly on the anchored Danish fleet. The DANNEBROG was one of the first Danish warships to get under way to meet and engage the Swedish fleet. However, combat damage caused the DANNEBROG to catch fire early in the engagement, possibly from the fire of her own batteries – in this regard, DANNEBROG was firing into the wind, and her cannons’ gunfire may have been blown back into the DANNEBROG’s highly inflammable rigging, or hull. Iver Hvitfeld, the DANNEBROG’s commander, with fire endangering his ship, refrained from running the DANNEBROG for shore in order to save DANNEBROG from destruction, as this course of action would have driven DANNEBROG into the rest of the Danish fleet and thus imperiled the Danish fleet’s orderly formation, including the safety of Danish transports which were inter-mixed with the Danish warships. Having refused to take the safer course of saving DANNEBROG and himself, Iver Hvitfeldt dropped anchor and, with the DANNEBROG ablaze, proceeded to fight the action with the entire Swedish fleet to its conclusion – thereby also affording the rest of the Danish fleet time to get under way, and its ships cleared for action. After an engagement lasting an hour and a half, the burning DANNEBROG finally exploded, killing Hvitfeldt and most of the DANNEBROG’s crew – there were only three survivors. The shock and concussion of the DANNEBROG’s explosion, as well as a change in the weather that affected the warships’ sailing abilities, essentially marked the end of the battle. Iver Hvitfeldt’s courageous, solitary, and ultimately decisive and sacrificial stand against the entire Swedish fleet, which resulted in the deliverance of the Danish fleet at a time of its greatest vulnerability and peril, has become one of the great symbols, and outstanding model of exemplary behavior in combat, in Denmark’s naval tradition. The site of the DANNEBROG’s explosion and destruction in Køge Bay has been archaeologically investigated during the 20th Century, and artifacts were recovered.
|
| Construc. No. 2 | |
| Name: | NELLEBLADET |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Henrik Spann |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 52 cannon – largest caliber, 18 pdrs. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 138′ Beam – 36′ 9″ Draft – 16′ 6″ (fore), 18′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1693, Launched – December 6, 1693 |
| Crew: | 360 |
| Out of Service: | 1740 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Admiral Henrik Spann, the designer of the battleship DANNEBROG, was in charge of shipbuilding at Holmen, as “Chef,” from 1690 to 1694.NELLEBLADET’s construction plans, of a very early type and style, survive. The plans are a side profile, and a lines plan as seen from astern. |
| Construc. No. 3 | |
| Name: | SORTE ØRN |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 20 cannon |
| Dimensions: | Length – 90′ Beam – 21′ Depth – 11′ 4″ |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1694; Launched – November 17, 1694 |
| Crew: | |
| Out of Service: | April, 1715 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | SORTE ØRN was captured by the Swedes in April, 1715, during the Great Northern War of 1709-1720. SORTE ØRN was also informally called ØRNEN in documentary sources.The Orlogsmuseet’s website does not indicate that design plans of this warship have survived to the present day. |
| Construc. No. 4 | |
| Name: | MAAGEN |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | Unknown |
| Weight: | 20 cannon – 4 pdr. |
| Armament: | |
| Dimensions: | Length – 90′ Beam – 21′ Depth – 10′ (fore), 11′ 4″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – March 21, 1694; Launched – June 28, 1694 |
| Crew: | 70 |
| Out of Service: | 1709 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | MAAGEN blew up in action in 1709, during the Great Northern War of 1709-1720.MAAGEN’s design plans, of a very early type and style, survive in the Danish Rigsarkivet. The plans include a side profile, and a lines plan as seen from astern. |
| Construc. No. 5 | |
| Name: | DRONNING LOVISA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Henrik Spann |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 64-78 cannon, 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 147′ Beam – 40′ Length – 19′ (fore), 22′ 6″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1695; Launched – December 19, 1695 |
| Crew: | 529 |
| Out of Service: | 1745 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Admiral Henrik Spann, the DRONNING LOVISA’s naval architect, also designed the battleship DANNEBROG of 1692, and was in charge of shipbuilding at Holmen from 1690 to 1694. This battleship must have been Henrik Spann’s last design. |
| Construc. No. 6 | |
| Name: | PRINTZ CARL |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | 700 læsts |
| Armament: | 50-54 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 134′ Beam – 36′ Depth – 15′ 6″ (fore), 16′ 8″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1696; Launched – October 15, 1696 |
| Crew: | 404 |
| Out of Service: | 1737 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | PRINTZ VILHELM (Construction No. 7) |
| Notes: | PRINTZ CARL’s launching took place jointly, as a ceremonial “double launching,” with her sister ship, PRINTZ VILHELM, on the same date.Based on their identical dimensions, the two sister-ships PRINTZ CARL and PRINTZ VILHELM were apparently the first two Danish ships-of-the-line, or apparently the first two of any type of Danish warship, built to the same design plan – marking a significant advance in Danish shipbuilding policy.Olaus Judichær, designer of these two sister-ships, served as Holmen’s Master Builder from 1692 to 1727, a period which included the entire span of the Great Northern War in which many of his ships served in fleet operations.
During his tenure as Holmen’s Master Builder, Judichær was responsible for not only designing 11 ships-of-the-line and 2 frigates, but also producing richly detailed and very beautiful and compelling colored design drawings pertaining to the decoration of many of the Danish warships he designed and built. Judichær’s colored design plans constitute a unique, unusual, and extremely valuable documentary source. Judichær’s construction model of the PRINTZ VILHELM exists, in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection, but the model has been damaged by fire. |
| Construc. No. 7 | |
| Name: | PRINTZ VILHELM |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | 700 læsts |
| Armament: | 52-54 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 134′ Beam – 36′ Depth – 15′ 6″ (fore), 16′ 8″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1696, Launched – October 15, 1696 |
| Crew: | |
| Out of Service: | 1734 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | PRINTZ CARL (Construction No. 6) |
| Notes: | Judichær’s colored design drawings of the PRINTZ WILHELM’s decorative scheme, including two perspectives of the PRINTZ WILHELM’s stern galleries, survive in the Danish archives.See the entries in the “Notes” to the PRINTZ CARL (Construction No. 6) regarding the ceremonial “double” launching of these two sister-ships, and the fact that they were apparently the first two warships in the Danish navy to be built to the same plan. |
| Construc. No. 8 | |
| Name: | PRINTZ CHRISTIAN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 64-76 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 152′ Beam – 41′ Depth – 19′ (fore), 22′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1697, Launched – 1697 |
| Crew: | 529 |
| Out of Service: | 1737 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | ? |
| Notes: | The Orlogsmuseet’s website indicates that no construction plans of this warship survive; this web site also states that the identity of the PRINTZ CHRISTIAN’s naval architect is unknown. |
| Construc. No. 9 | |
| Name: | SOPHIA HEDEVIG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 60-76 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 157′ 4″ Beam – 41′ Draft – 21′ |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1697, Launched – 1697 |
| Crew: | 529 |
| Out of Service: | 1728 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | ? |
| Notes: | Judichær’s colored design drawing of the PRINTZ CHIRSTIAN’s bow and figurehead survive in the Danish archives. |
| Construc. No. 10 | |
| Name: | FREDERICUS QUARTUS |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line & Fleet Flagship |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | 1695 læsts |
| Armament: | 110 cannon – 36 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 185′ Beam – 50′ Draft – 20′ 2″ (fore), 22′ 6″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1699, Launched – December 19, 1699 |
| Crew: | 950 |
| Out of Service: | 1732 – condemned |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | Notes: A “three decker,” and one of only a handful of three deckers ever built for the Danish-Norwegian fleet, FREDERICUS QUARTUS is the largest warship ever constructed for the Danish navy and, hence, in a Danish shipyard, during the entire age of sail.By comparison to the FREDERICUS QUARTUS’ great hull dimensions, the hull dimensions of the final “three decker” to have been built for the Danish navy, the Danish fleet flagship CHRISTIAN DEN SYVENDE, built at Holmen nearly sixty years later, in 1767, were: length – 182′ x beam – 49′ x draft – 21′ (aft). CHRISTIAN DEN SYVENDE also only mounted 90 cannon.Denmark’s large and prestigious three-deckers were always named after the reigning Danish monarch, were intended to serve as Denmark’s fleet flagship, and were the pride of the Danish fleet. Conversely, these three-deckers’ prodigious construction cost always represented a substantial investment of Denmark’s available defense budget.As Denmark’s fleet flagship, FREDERICUS QUARTUS is one of less than a dozen Danish battleships ever to have carried 36 pdr. cannon in her main battery, the largest caliber of cannon ever carried on a Danish battleship to equip an entire battery on an entire gundeck during the age of sail.
Originally named STORE CHRISTIANUS QUINTUS, after the reigning Danish king at the time she was designed, her name was changed to FREDERICUS QUARTUS upon Frederick IV’s accession to the Danish throne. Ironically, despite the FREDERICUS QUARTUS’ awesome size and firepower, during the Great Northern War she never became involved in “close quarters” action with Swedish warships, which she should have been able to easily shell into submission. Therefore, the FREDERICUS QUARTUS’ war record during the Great Northern War departed from the examples of the Danish fleet flagships of the 17th Century, which were typically at the center of fleet actions, in close quarter combat with Swedish warships. After the FREDERICUS QUARTUS, none of Denmark’s subsequent “three deckers” had the opportunity, while under sail, to prove itself in combat against the enemy. In the history of the newly nationalized Danish warship design and construction, at the Danish navy’s new naval shipyard at Nyholm, FREDERICUS QUARTUS represents a historic internal demarcation point within the warship list detailed later in this article, because she was the last Danish battleship built during the 17th Century. FREDERICUS QUARTUS was one of the most beautifully decorated Danish battleships of her day, though possibly the design of her ornamentation did not rate as highly as the superb ELEPHANTEN of 1703. Judichær’s complete and richly detailed colored design drawings of the carvings and decorative scheme for the FREDERICUS QUARTUS’s bow, figurehead, and stern galleries survive in the Danish archives. The beautiful, large-scale (larger than 1:48), and fully-rigged ship model in the lobby of the “Admiral Hotel” on the harbor waterfront in Copenhagen, appears to be of the FREDERICUS QUARTUS. |
| Construc. No. 11 | |
| Name: | HAVFRUEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – ? Beam – ? Draft – 19′ 6″ (fore), 22′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1700, Launched – December 8, 1701 |
| Crew: | 520 |
| Out of Service: | 1732 |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | The Orlogsmuseet’s web site indicates that HAVFRUEN’s construction plans do not exist – i.e., have not survived.HAVFRUEN means “the mermaid,” a traditional name for Danish warships during the age of sail. However, “Havfruen” has been mistakenly translated as “housewife.” |
| Construc. No. 12 | |
| Name: | ELEPHANTEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 90 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 169′ 10″ Beam – 45′ Draft – 17′ (fore) 19′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1700, Launched – April 14, 1703 |
| Crew: | 794 |
| Out of Service: | 1728 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | The ELEPHANTEN, sometimes referred to as the NYE ELEPHANTEN, was the largest Danish warship built between the colossal FREDERICUS QUARTUS, built four year before ELEPHANTEN, and the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA, completed nearly two decades later, in 1722, two years after the conclusion of the Great Northern War.ELEPHANTEN was not only extremely large and powerful, she was also beautiful, perhaps the most beautifully decorated Danish warship built during Judichær’s tenure as Holmen’s Master Shipbuilder from 1692 to 1729, and for some time thereafter.Judichær’s splendid colored design plans of the ELEPHANTEN’s carvings, figurehead, and overall decorative scheme survive in the Danish archives, and are among the most compelling of Judichær’s surviving creations in this decorative field. Indeed, Judichær’s colored design scheme for the ELEPHANTEN’s stern is one of Denmark’s modern icons of the Danish navy’s achievement in the field of warship decorative design.
Judichær’s wood construction model of the ELEPHANTEN, showing internal construction detail, is in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 13 | |
| Name: | JYLLAND |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – ? Beam – ? Draft – ? |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1703, Launched – May 31, 1704 |
| Crew: | 520 |
| Out of Service: | 1733 |
| Sister Ships: | Probably none |
| Notes: | Judichær’s construction plans of the JYLLAND still exist in the Danish Rigsarkivet. |
| Construc. No. 14 | |
| Name: | FYEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 52 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 143′ 6″ Beam – 36′ Draft – 15′ 4″ (fore), 16′ 2″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1704, Launched – May 9. 1705 |
| Crew: | 400 |
| Out of Service: | 1734 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Judichær’s colored design plan for at least the FYEN’s stern galleries survive in the Danish archives, and illustrate that the scale of carving and overall ornamentation for this 50-gun ship was not as extensive, and did not possess the grandeur, as the scale of ornamentation and decorative schemes employed on the larger Danish warships Judichær designed for the Danish navy.Judichær’s wooden construction model of the FYEN, showing interior construction detail, survives, and forms part of the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 15 | |
| Name: | WENDEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 167′ Beam – 43′ Draft – 18′ 6″ (fore), 20′ 6″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1705, Launched – May 30, 1706 |
| Crew: | 550 |
| Out of Service: | 1741 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | After the ELEPHANTEN of 1703, and the JUSTITIA of 1707, WENDEN was the next largest Danish battleship to be constructed in the twenty-three year period between the building of the colossal FREDERICUS QUARTUS, in 1699, and the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA, completed in 1722, two years after the conclusion of the Great Northern War in 1720.Aside from being one of Denmark’s largest battleships of her day, WENDEN was also beautiful, though certainly not as beautiful as the incomparable ELEPHANTEN, or perhaps the later, and larger, JUSTITIA of 1707.Judichær’s colored design plans of the WENDEN’s stern galleries survive in the Danish archives, and they are an excellent adjunct to Judichær’s surviving lines plans for the configuration of WENDEN’s hull – together, they permit a nearly complete modern impression of the WENDEN’s overall appearance, including the ship’s decorative scheme.
Judichær’s wooden construction model of the WENDEN, showing interior construction detail, still exists, and forms part of the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 16 | |
| Name: | DELMENHORST |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 50 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 137′ 6″ Beam – 36′ Draft – 15′ 6″ (fore), 16′ 4″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1706, Launched – April 2, 1708 |
| Crew: | 400 |
| Out of Service: | 1736 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Judichær’s colored design plans for the decorative scheme of the 50-gun DELMENHORST’s stern galleries survive, and illustrate the absence of the grandeur and scale of ornamentation which characterize Judichær’s decorative schemes for the larger Danish warships he designed. Nevertheless, the DELMENHORST’s design plans are still compelling.Judichær’s wooden construction model of the DELMENHORST, showing interior construction detail, survives, and is contained in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 17 | |
| Name: | JUSTITIA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 86 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 168′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 21′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1707, Launched – 1707 |
| Crew: | 725 |
| Out of Service: | 1751 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | After the ELEPHANTEN of 1703, the JUSTITIA of 1707 was the next largest Danish battleship to be constructed in the twenty-three year period between the building of the colossal fleet flagship FREDERICUS QUARTUS in 1699, and the completion of the battleship DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA in 1722, two years following the conclusion of the Great Northern War.This very large battleship was built very quickly, being completed in the short space of just one year after the date her keel was laid down.In addition to being large and powerful, the JUSTITIA, after the ELEPHANTEN and, perhaps, the FREDERICUS QUARTUS, was possibly the most beautifully decorated Danish battleship of her day.
Judichaer’s richly evocative, colored decorative plans for JUSTITIA’s stern galleries survive and, together with Judichær’s excellent lines plans of JUSTITIA’s hull, provide a nearly complete modern impression of this 1707 warship’s original overall appearance. |
| Construc. No. 18 | |
| Name: | BESKIÆRMEREN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 72 iron cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 157′ Beam – 40′ Draft – 16′ 6″ (fore), 17′ 4″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1708, Launched – October 8, 1708 |
| Crew: | 490 |
| Out of Service: | 1741 |
| Sister Ships: | EBENETZER (?) (Construction No. 20), was built to the same dimensions as BESKIÆRMEREN, but it is not known if these two supposed sister-ships were in fact built to the same plan. Somewhat different dimensions for these two ships are given in a second source. |
| Notes: | If HØYENHALD (Construction No. 19) and EBENETZER (Construction No. 20) were in fact sister-ships, it would mark the first occasion since the building of the sister-ships PRINTZ CARL and PRINTZ VILHELM (Construction Nos. 6 and 7) in 1696 (i.e., 12 years earlier) that two Danish warships were built at Holmen to the same plan.The design plans for this warship specifically indicate that her designed armament was intended to consist of iron cannon.Judichær’s wooden construction model of the BESKIÆRMEREN, showing interior construction detail, has survived, and is contained in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 19 | |
| Name: | HØYENHALD |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 30 cannon – 8 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 110′ Beam – 29′ Draft – 11′ 3″ (fore), 12′ 3″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1708, Launched – 1708 |
| Crew: | 140 |
| Out of Service: | 1754 |
| Sister Ships: | RAA (Construction No. 21) |
| Notes: | HØYENHALD’s construction plans have survived and are located in the Danish Rigsarkivet. These design plans include a side profile (including details of the stern’s ornamentation and carvings), a deck plan showing the framing, a detailed mid-section plan, and a lines plan as seen from astern. |
| Construc. No. 20 | |
| Name: | EBENETZER |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 64 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 157′ Beam – 40′ Draft – 16′ 6″ (fore), 17′ 4″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1709, Launched – December 11, 1709 |
| Crew: | 490 |
| Out of Service: | 1747 |
| Sister Ships: | BESKIÆRMEREN (?) (Construction No. 18), built to the same dimensions; however, it is not known if these two warships were built to the same design. In regard to their possible sister-ship status, it’s noted that somewhat different dimensions for these two ships are quoted in a separate source. |
| Notes: | EBENETZER was jointly launched, in a ceremonial “double” launching, on the same date as was the frigate RAA (Construction No. 21). |
| Construc. No. 21 | |
| Name: | RAA |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 30 cannon – 8 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 110′ Beam – 29 ‘ Draft – 11′ 3′ (fore), 12’ 3″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1709, Launched – December 11, 1709 |
| Crew: | 140 |
| Out of Service: | 1751 |
| Sister Ships: | HØYENHALD (Construction No. 19) |
| Notes: | RAA was jointly launched, in a ceremonial “double” launching, with the ship-of-the-line EBENETZER (Construction No. 20).Beginning in 1717, RAA served for a time as part of a Danish naval squadron under the command of the famous Danish-Norwegian naval hero Tordenskjold, who was born in Norway.The RAA’s beautiful and detailed colored design drawings by Judichær survive in the Danish archives.
Unlike most of Judichær’s colored design drawings of a warship’s exterior decorative scheme, typically confined to representations of a warship’s bow or stern ornamentation, Judichær’s unique colored design drawings for the RAA pertain to this frigate’s constructional scheme of the frigate’s entire hull, including the hull’s deck plan and interior features. |
| Construc. No. 22 | |
| Name: | LAALAND |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 50 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 138′ Beam – 36′ Draft – 15′ 6″ (fore), 16′ 4″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1710, Launched – June 4, 1711 |
| Crew: | 400 |
| Out of Service: | 1762 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Although LAALAND was laid down in 1710, the second year of the Great Northern War of 1709-1720, and the war therefore continued for an entire decade following the laying of her keel, LAALAND is the last ship-of-the-line, or in fact of any warship of the size covered in this warship list, to be assigned a “Construction Number” and to be laid down at the Holmen shipyard for a period of eleven years, i.e., until a year after the conclusion of the Great Northern War in 1720.In view of this 11-year hiatus in major warship construction at Holmen during the war years, the LAALAND’s completion marks an internal demarcation point within this article’s warship list, and the inception of a very lengthy wartime hiatus in Danish naval construction at Holmen, notwithstanding the fact that Olaus Judichær remained as Holmen’s Master Shipbuilder for another 16 years after LAALAND’s completion in 1710, i.e., until 1727.LAALAND was active in Danish fleet operations from the earliest part of the Great Northern War, and by 1716 acquired historical notoriety by becoming the flagship of a squadron of warships commanded by the famous Danish naval hero Tordenskjold.
Under Tordenskjold, LAALAND took part in Tordenskjold’s attack on the Swedish port of Gothenborg in 1717 and then in Tordenskjold’s attack on the Swedish port of Strömstad, also in 1717. In 1719, LAALAND participated in Tordenskjold’s successful attack on the Swedish port of Marstrand. At the end of the Great Northern War, LAALAND was participating in Tordenskjold’s blockade of Gothenborg. |
| Construc. No. 23 | |
| Name: | DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 90 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 170′ Beam – 45′ Draft – 18′ 6″ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1721, Launched – 1722 |
| Crew: | 663 |
| Out of Service: | 1752 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA was the first ship-of-the-line constructed at Holmen after a hiatus of 11 years, a hiatus in Danish warship construction presumably due to Denmark’s lack of financial and dockyard resources during the Great Northern War of 1709-1720.For Holmen’s first major warship built after an 11-year hiatus, Denmark chose to build big, very big.With the exception of the Danish fleet flagship CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS, completed in 1733, DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA is the largest Danish warship built in the period between 1722 – following the 11-year hiatus – and 1744, the date at which the period covered by this article’s warship list terminates. Only the ELEPHANTEN, completed in 1741, approaches the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA in overall size.
DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA’s displacement is not known, and is thus unavailable for comparative purposes to gauge her relative size in comparison with other Holmen warships. However, except for the Danish fleet flagships (FREDERICUS QUARTUS and CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS), the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA has the greatest hull length of any of the Danish warships in this article’s entire ship list for which the dimensions for the warships’ hull lengths are recorded. Notwithstanding her great hull length, DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA’s maximum draft was only 20′, the same draft as Danish warships whose hull length was substantially shorter than that of the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA – see, e.g., the draft and hull lengths of Construction Nos. 27 through 32. In comparison, the 1741 ELEPHANTEN’s draft was 8″ deeper forward, and a foot deeper aft, a major difference in terms of hull volume, when the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA’s hull length was a scant one foot greater than ELEPHANTEN’s, and their beams were identical. In comparison to the 1741 ELEPHANTEN’s length to draft ratio, DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA’s length to draft ratio raises an issue of the adequacy of the latter’s hull stability. Except for the Danish fleet flagship FREDERIK DEN 5TH, it would be more than a half a century before another Danish warship would be built with a hull length of 170′ feet or more, after which time this hull length became commonplace in Danish ships-of-the-line. Although designed and built by Olaus Judichær, who produced such beautifully and tastefully decorated Danish warships earlier in his career, the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA’s ornamentation represents a radical departure from the tasteful style in which earlier 18th Century Danish battleships were decorated. DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA carried French regency ornamentation, including what appears to be the most massive stern galleries of any Danish warship of the period, in what perhaps constituted the most garish and unsightly ornamented Danish battleship during the age of sail. Massive stern galleries of this nature also raises a serious question of the unnecessary top weight such a superstructure imposed upon a warship and her sailing qualities and stability. |
| Construc. No. 24 | |
| Name: | SLESVIG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 54 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – ? Beam – ? Draft – 16′ 6″ (fore), 17′ 6″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1723, Launched – April 15, 1725 |
| Crew: | 400 |
| Out of Service: | 1733 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | SLESVIG had a relatively short service life in the Danish navy, as she was sold to the Danish Asiatic Company in 1733. SLESVIG made several trading voyages to China for the Danish Asiatic Company. |
| Construc. No. 25 | |
| Name: | SOPHIA MAGDALENA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Olaus Judichær and J. A. von Paulsen |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 80 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 43′ Draft – 17′ 5″ (fore), 18′ 7″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1725, Launched – December 16, 1727 |
| Crew: | 550 |
| Out of Service: | 1758 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Though SOFIA MAGDALENE was laid down the same year as the PRINTZ FREDERIK (Construction No. 26), and though both of these battleships had exactly the same dimensions for hull length and beam, they differed in the depth of their drafts, PRINTZ FREDERIK being 7″ deeper forward, and 5″ deeper aft. However, these two ships were designed by different naval architects. See the entry under “Notes” for PRINTZ FREDERIK below, regarding a possible explanation for this difference in dimensions between these two ships.Judichær’s splendid and unique colored design plan of the SOPHIA MAGDALENA’s entire hull, from both a side profile and including decorative detail, combined with a plan view of the SOPHIA MAGDALENA’s deck fittings and framing, survive in the Danish archives.Fortunately the SOFIA MAGDALENE, which was completed five years after the garish and unsightly DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA in 1722, did not repeat the excessive and vulgar French style of ornamentation employed in the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA, and instead reverted to a more restrained, tasteful style. |
| Construc. No. 26 | |
| Name: | PRINTZ FREDERIK |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Rasmus Krag |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 78 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 43′ Draft – 18′ (fore), 19′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – 1725, Launched – November 28, 1727 |
| Crew: | 550 |
| Out of Service: | 1758 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | PRINTZ FREDERIK was the only warship designed and constructed by Rasmus Krag. Krag’s design for the PRINTZ FREDERIK was found to be unsatisfactory, and Krag was dismissed from his post as the Danish navy’s Constructor.See the entry under the “Notes” section of Construction No. 25 for comments on the closeness of the PRINTZ FREDERIK’s design dimensions with those of SOFIA MAGDALENE (Construction No. 25). However, these two warships were designed by different naval architects.Though laid down the same year as the SOFIA MAGDALENE, PRINTZ FREDERIK may have been intended as a prototype to ascertain the designing and construction abilities of naval architect Rasmus Krag prior to the time Krag’s predecessor, Olaus Judichær, left office at Holmen. |
| Construc. No. 27 | |
| Name: | TRE LØVER |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 886½ læsts |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 150′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – May 5, 1728, Launched – March 21, 1730 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1753 |
| Sister Ships: | SVANEN (Construction No. 28) – but see the commentary in the Notes section below. |
| Notes: | The TRE LØVER and SVANEN, apparent sister ships, were both laid down together on the same date, and they were both jointly launched together in a ceremonial “double” launching on the same date.These two ships had the superficial appearance of being sister-ships, built to the same lines of the same identical plan. However, for evaluative purposes to be established by comparative trials, one of these two ships was constructed in accordance with British construction methods, and another by French construction methods – apparently two different designs were involved as well, although these two ships’ exact same weight (if this weight is recorded accurately) casts doubt on this assumption.TRE LØVER and SVANEN were built, respectively, to the British and French construction methods by two different Danish naval constructors, one of which, the designer Knud Benstrup, built his ship according to the French methods of construction. This debate between the merits of French methods of construction or design (construction and design were separate, not integrated, subjects of debate) and those of the British, seems to have continued throughout most of Danish naval history.
Parenthetically, what seems to have bothered the British the most about the large number of captured French warships the British employed in British naval service, was not how the French designed these ships – French designs were often admired and even by the British – but how weakly the French ships were built. PRINTZ FREDERIK (Construction No. 26) and SOPHIA MAGDALENA (Construction No. 25) also took part in the sailing trials involving SVANEN (Construction No. 28) and TRE LØVER (Construction No. 27) discussed earlier in this Note, and the latter two ships, i.e., the newest of the four, were found to be the most satisfactory. |
| Construc. No. 28 | |
| Name: | SVANEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 866½ læsts |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 150′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – May 3, 1728, Launched – March 21, 1730 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1754 |
| Sister Ships: | TRE LØVER (Construction No. 27) – but see the commentary in the Notes section under the entry for the TRE LØVER, above, for further details on the differing construction of these two apparent sister-ships. |
| Notes: | The SVANEN and TRE LØVER, apparent sister ships, were both laid down together on the same date, and they were both subsequently jointly launched together in a ceremonial “double” launching on the same date. |
| Construc. No. 29 | |
| Name: | PRINDSESSE CHARLOTTE AMALIA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 887 læsts |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 150′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – August 7, 1730, Launched – May 12, 1731 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1766 |
| Sister Ships: | PRINDSESSA LOVISA (Construction No. 30). |
| Notes: | PRINDSESSE CHARLOTTE AMALIA and PRINDSESSA LOVISA (Construction No. 30) were both laid down together on the same date, and they were both launched together in a ceremonial joint launching on the same date.Although these two sister ships have exactly the same dimensions as the TRE LØVER (Construction No. 27) and SVANEN (Construction No 28), they were both larger by ½ of a læst, indicating that although their dimensions may have been the same, the lines of their configuration might have been different. |
| Construc. No. 30 | |
| Name: | PRINDSESSE LOVISA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 887 læsts |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 150′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – August 7, 1730, Launched – May 12, 1731 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1771 |
| Sister Ships: | PRINDSESSE CHARLOTTE AMALIA (Construction No. 29). |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.PRINDSESSE LOVISA and PRINDSESSE CHARLOTTE AMALIA were both laid down together on the same date, and they were both subsequently launched together in a joint launching on the same date.Although these two sister-ships have exactly the same dimensions as the TRE LØVER (Construction No. 27) and the SVANEN (Construction No. 28), they both differed from these earlier two ships by being heavier by ½ a læst, indicating that although their hull dimensions may have been identical, perhaps the lines of their hulls differed in configuration, thus causing an increase in hull volume. |
| Construc. No. 31 | |
| Name: | MARKGREVINDE SOPHIA CHRISTINE |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 154′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – September 4, 1731, Launched – August 5, 1732 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1756 |
| Sister Ships: | PRINDSESSE SOPHIA HEDEVIG (Construction No. 32) |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.According to their hull dimensions, the only difference between (1) the sister-ships TRE-LØVER and SVANEN, and the sister-ships PRINDSESSE CHARLOTTE AMALIE and PRINDSESSE LOVISA, all four of which have exactly the same hull dimensions (although the latter two differ in weight by ½ a “læst”), and (2) the sister-ships MARKGREVINDE SOPHIE CHIRSTINE (Construction No. 31 – this entry) and PRINDSESSE SOPHIA HEDEVIG (Construction No. 32), is that the hull length of the last two ships has been increased by a significant four feet – otherwise, the beam and draft dimensions of the last two ships are identical to the previous four ships.In design terms, the significant jump (4 feet) in the hull length of the last two ships (Construction Nos. 31 and 32) is remarkable, and may indicate that experience with the sailing performance of the first four ships identified in this Note (i.e., Construction Nos. 27, 28, 29, and 30) was found wanting, probably because they were deemed to be slow sailers – in this regard, an increase in hull length in relation to beam often signified a need for an increase in sailing speed over a previous model. |
| Construc. No. 32 | |
| Name: | PRINDSESSE SOPHIA HEDEVIG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 154′ Beam – 40′ 7″ Draft – 17′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid -June 12, 1731, Launched – December 1, 1731 |
| Crew: | 449 |
| Out of Service: | 1754 |
| Sister Ships: | MARKGREVINDE SOPHIA CHRISTINE (Construction No. 31). |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.See the entry in the Note to Construction No. 32 for a discussion of the increased hull length of this 2-ship MARKGREVINDE SOPHIA CHRISTINE class over the identical hull lengths of the previous four ships-of-the-line built at Holmen, i.e., Construction Nos. 27, 28, 29, and 30. |
| Construc. No. 33 | |
| Name: | DITMARSKEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 663½ læsts |
| Armament: | 22 – 18 pdr. cannon, 22 – 12 pdr. cannon, 6 – 6 pdr. cannon |
| Dimensions: | Length – 139′ Beam – 37′ 1″ Draft – 15′ 10″ (fore), 19′ 1″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – August 24, 1732, Launched – December 2, 1732 |
| Crew: | 1767 |
| Out of Service: | |
| Sister Ships: | DITMARSKEN has the same dimensions as the SLESVIG (Construction No. 35), but a different measured weight, or hull volume, in “læsts” |
| Notes: |
| Construc. No. 34 | |
| Name: | CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line – Fleet Flagship |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 90 cannon – 36 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 180′ Beam – 48′ 4″ Draft – 19′ 10″ (fore), 21″ 8″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – May 20, 1732, Launched – December 7, 1733 |
| Crew: | |
| Out of Service: | 1769 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | A ‘three-decker,” designed as fleet flagship of the Danish-Norwegian fleet, and due to her status as the largest, newest and most prestigious of Denmark’s battleships, was named after the reigning Danish monarch.Although the construction of CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS represented a substantial investment of Denmark’s available defense budget, she appears to have only been commissioned once, and very briefly, during her long life, in 1743, as a reserve part of a Danish fleet commissioned as a show of force over an issue regarding the succession to the Swedish throne, for which the Danish Crown Price was a contender. However, once commissioned, the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS never appears to have left harbor.Regarding the fact that CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’ appears to have only been commissioned once, these large “three deckers” were as expensive to man, fit out for active service, and to employ operationally as these fleet flagships were to build in the first place. Therefore, reasons of economy seem to have dictated against the commissioning of this largest of Danish shipes-of-the-line.
CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS was one of less than a dozen Danish battleships to every carry 36 pdr. cannon in her main battery, the heaviest caliber of cannon to have ever been carried on a Danish battleship to equip an entire battery on an entire gundeck. Knud Benstrup’s design of this great ship, the largest and most prestigious in the Danish fleet and thus named after the reigning Danish monarch, caused a major bureaucratic scandal – see the description of this event in the introductory remarks regarding Knud Benstrup at the beginning of this article. The cause of this major bureaucratic uproar regarding the depth of the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS’s draft was apparently that, as built, her draft drew 6 inches more than as planned. In this reagard, the draft of Danish warships were limited by the practical tactical problem posed by 22 foot depth of the Drogden Channel, in the southern end of the Sound, through which Danish warships would have to pass to engage in operations in the Baltic. The accusations against Benstrup and his design and construction of the CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS were apparently either unjust or invalid, or both, and Benstrup was dismissed from service, in 1736, after a tenure of only six years as the Danish navy’s Senior Master Builder. However, although the Danish navy subsequently discovered that Benstrup’s design work was superior to other available naval architects, and attempted to recall him to Danish naval service, Benstrup understandably refused. |
| Construc. No. 35 | |
| Name: | SLESVIG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 689 3/4 læsts |
| Armament: | 50 cannon – 18 pdr. in main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 139″ Beam – 37′ 1″ Draft – 15′ 10″ (fore), 19′ 1″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – April 8, 1733, Launched – December 28, 1734 |
| Crew: | 381 |
| Out of Service: | 1768 |
| Sister Ships: | SLESVIG has the same hull dimensions as the DITMARSKEN (Construction No. 33), but a different hull volume, or weight, in “læsts” |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.SLESVIG was built to replace the earlier ship-of-the-line SLESVIG (Construction No. 24) completed in 1725, which was sold to the Danish Asiatic Company in 1733. |
| Construc. No. 36 | |
| Name: | BLAA HEYREN |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 18 – 4 pdr. cannon |
| Dimensions: | Length – 86′ Beam – 22′ 2″ Draft – 9′ 4″ (fore), 11′ 6′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – March 12, 1734, Launched – July 29, 1734 |
| Crew: | 81 |
| Out of Service: | 1756 – sold |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.BLAA HEYREN is the only frigate designed by Knud Benstrup; all of Benstrup’s other design work applied to battleships, of which he is credited with designing a total of fifteen.A notable feature of BLAA HEYREN’s design was her pronounced drag, i.e., the pronounced difference between her fore and aft draft. BLAA HEYREN’s after draft was 2′ 2″ greater than her forward draft, a considerable difference for a vessel with a relatively short hull length.
Compare the pronounced drag of BLAA HEYREN’s draft to the draft of the frigate CHRISTIANSØE (Contruction No. 44), designed by the French emigré naval architect Laurent Barbé. Both frigates were of similar size, yet CHRISTIANSØE has virtually no drag. In contrast to her marked drag, BLAA HEYREN had a relatively narrow beam and leaner midsection for a vessel of her hull length, indicating she was desinged for speed. Her lack of a fuller hull body indicates that her hull may have lacked the necessary stability as a gun platform to enable her guns to be served in heavier weather. BLAA HEYREN formed part of a Danish naval squadron, led by the frigate FALSTER (Construction No. 46), on a diplomatic mission to Morocco regarding the vexing problem of the Barbary pirates’ predations against Danish commercial shipping. BLAA HEYREN was therefore present when the FALSTER was accidentally destroyed by fire in the Moroccan port of Safia in 1753. BLAA HEYREN was sold out of service, to the “Rentekammeret.” |
| Construc. No. 37 | |
| Name: | NORSKE LØVE |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1176¼ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – May 17, 1734, Launched – February 9, 1735 |
| Crew: | |
| Out of Service: | 1764 |
| Sister Ships: | Based upon their identical hull dimensions, and their design by the same naval architect, the following four ships are presumed to be the NORKSE LØVE’s sister ships – JYLLAND (Construction No. 40), WENDEN (Construction No. 45), DRONNING LOVISA (Construction No. 48, and KJØBENHAVN (Construction No. 49) |
| Notes: | By convention, NORSKE LØVE is the “name” ship of this presumed class of a total of five sister-ships.If the group of five ships identified in the preceding “Sister Ships” entry were in fact sister-ships, because they were presumably built to the same lines (as is indicated by their identical hull dimensions), then the building of this series of five ships to the same design plan would be the first time in Holmen’s history that five ships of a major class of Danish warships were built to the same design plan – a significant milestone in Danish construction history, marking a significant advance in Danish naval construction policy.Previous to this supposed NORSKE LØVE class of five sister-ships, only three pairs of ships were ever built at Holmen to the same lines, i.e., Construction Nos. 6 & 7; and the two pairs of ships noted in Construction Nos. 27-30, which may in fact represent a unified class rather two separate classes, as is indicated by their differing weights (see the entry to the “Notes” section of Construction No. 31, above).
See, in connection with the apparent advance in Danish construction policy that is seems to be represented by the building of the presumed NORSKE LØVE class of five sister-ships, the entry in the “Note” section to the FYEN (Construction No. 39), discussing the similar building by the Danish navy of a number of warships to the lines of the battlship FYEN, built at Holmen just one year after the NORSKE LØVE. Thus, the apparent advance in Danish construction policy in connection with the building of this presumed NORSKE LØVE class of five ships seems to have been continued with the Danish navy’s building of 7 ships to the basic lines of the FYEN. “Norske Løve” means “Norwegian lion,” and the distinctive symbol of the Norwegian lion, holding an equally distinctive ax, was the emblem of Norwegian part of the dual Kingdom of Denmark-Norway that existed until 1814. The symbol of the “Norwegian lion” even appeared on Norwegian coinage employed in Norway throughout the history of the dual Kingdom of Denmark-Norway. “Norske Løve” was a traditional name for a warship in the Danish-Norwegian fleet during the age of sail, until this name was replaced with NORGE, the name of the Danish-Norwegian ship-of-the-line built by the Danish naval architect Hohlenberg and completed in 1800. Earlier Danish-Norwegian battleships named NORSKE LØVE were (1) a battleship built in 1634 and condemned in 1653; (2) the 1634 battleship was immediately replaced with a battleship named NORSKE LØVE built at Lübeck in 1654, and wrecked in 1666; (3) the 1654 battleship in turn was immediately replaced by another NORSKE LØVE built 1665, and wrecked in 1679; and (4) the 1665 NORSKE LØVE’s loss was immediately replaced by a NORSKE LØVE completed in 1680, which was ultimately sunk in 1715 as a foundation for the Tre Kroner harbor battery in Copenhagen. Due to the 11-year hiatus in major Danish-Norwegian warship construction that occurred during the Great Northern War, a new NORSKE LØVE, to replace the one sunk in 1715 was not laid down until 1734, that is, Holmen’s “Construction No. 37” profiled here. The nearly 20-year chronological break between the sinking of the 1689 NORSKE LØVE in 1715, and the laying down of Holmen’s Construction No. 37 in 1734, as profiled here, is the only extensive break in time where a battleship named NORSKE LØVE was not on strength with the Danish-Norwegian navy – i.e., until the NORGE, of 1800, replaced the traditional name of NORSKE LØVE as the Danish-Norwegian warship which was named in honor of the Norwegian part of the dual Kingdom of Denmark-Norway. |
| Construc. No. 38 | |
| Name: | DELMENHORST |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 709 læsts |
| Armament: | 50 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 139′ Beam – 37′ 4″ Draft – 16′ 7″ (fore), 19′ 3″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – August 11, 1734, Launched – September 27, 1735 |
| Crew: | 384 |
| Out of Service: | 1777 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm.A very small ship-of-the-line. No additional warships were built to DELMONHORST’s design, probably because the design of the similarly-sized FYEN, which was built the year after the DELMONHORST, won significant official favor, and was therefore employed as a prototype to build a series of similarly-sized warships. |
| Construc. No. 39 | |
| Name: | FYEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Andreas Gerner |
| Weight: | 689 3/4 læsts |
| Armament: | 50 cannon – 18 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 144′ Beam – 38′ 6″ Draft – 16′ 2″ (fore), 17′ 8″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – August 22, 1735, Launched – September 13, 1736 |
| Crew: | 385 |
| Out of Service: | 1745 |
| Sister Ships: | See “Notes” |
| Notes: | This was the only warship design produced by Andreas Gerner. However, FYEN’s design was so extremely successful that the Danish navy utilized FYEN’s design served as a prototype, as the Danish navy proceeded to build a total of seven further ships to the FYEN’s basic lines, or as smaller versions of FYEN’s basic design – 6 of these ships were constructed by Anders Turesen, the Danish navy’s Constructor at Holmen from 1739-1753.Unfortunately, the identity of the 6 further Danish warships constructed to the FYEN’s basic lines are not known and, on the basis of the FYEN’s hull dimensions, these ships cannot be identified by comparison to the hull dimensions of any of the other Danish warships noted in this ship list.FYEN was sold in 1745 to the Danish Asiatic Company, for which FYEN conducted three voyages to China. The Danish Asiatic Company condemned the FYEN in 1751, and the ship was sold at auction in 1752.
A very famous, relatively large-scale, full-rigged Danish Admiralty model of the FYEN, built contemporaneously with the full-scale FYEN, is in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. |
| Construc. No. 40 | |
| Name: | JYLLAND |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1176¼ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – January 30, 1738, Launched – January 27, 1739 |
| Crew: | 550 |
| Out of Service: | 1761 |
| Sister Ships: | NORSKE LØVE (Construction No. 37), WENDEN (Construction No. 45), DRONNING LOVISA (Construction No. 48), and KJØBENHAVN (Construction No. 49) |
| Notes: | See the discussion, in the entry under the “Notes” section to Construction No. 37, of the basis for the presumption of the sister-ship status of the five ships built to the NORSKE LØVE’s hull dimensions and, if these ships were in fact sister-ships, the significance of the building of this class of five ships in the history of Danish warship construction. |
| Construc. No. 41 | |
| Name: | DANNEBROG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Diderich Thura |
| Weight: | 1177 læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 165′ 10″ Beam – 43′ 8″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 19′ 6″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – January 30, 1738, Launched – January 27, 1739 |
| Crew: | 550 |
| Out of Service: | 1761 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Diderich Thura, the Danish navy’s Master Shipbuilder at Holmen from 1734-1758, only designed and built 2 ships-of-the-line and 2 frigates/brigantines (including the frigate FALSTER, Construction No. 46) during his tenure in office – which extended beyond the period covered by this article’s warship list.Aside from Rasmus Krag, who only designed one ship-of-the-line for the Danish navy, Diderich Thura is the least prolific of the Danish naval architects covered by this ship list. Thur’s activities as the Danish navy’s Master Shipbuilder seem to have been directed more at construction than in design. |
| Construc. No. 42 | |
| Name: | OLDENBORG |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 956 3/4 læsts |
| Armament: | 60 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 158′ 10″ Beam – 42′ Draft – 17′ 6″ (fore), 19′ 3″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – January 12, 1740, Launched – August 8, 1740 |
| Crew: | 486 |
| Out of Service: | 1778 |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | Built at Gammelholm. |
| Construc. No. 43 | |
| Name: | ELEPHANTEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Laurent Barbé |
| Weight: | 1279 læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 169′ Beam – 45′ Draft – 19′ 2″ (fore), 21′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – January 30, 1740, Launched – May 6, 1741 |
| Crew: | 668 |
| Out of Service: | 1760 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Aside from the Danish fleet flagship CHRISTIANUS SEXTUS (Construction No. 34), this ELEPHANTEN, together with the DRONNING ANNA SOPHIA (Construction No. 23), were the two largest Danish battleships built at Holmen following an 11-year hiatus in major Danish naval construction during the Great Northern War of 1709-1720.A surviving artist’s model of the ELEPHANTEN’s figurehead, painted in color, is now located in the Danish Orlogsmuseet’s model collection – the survival of this splendid and stunning model is a great gift from the past, and represents not only a superb achievement in the ship carver’s art form, but also gives taste of what so many other ships’ figureheads must have looked like, if only they had survived to the present.No artists’ drawings of a ship’s proposed figurehead can possibly achieve the dramatic effect of viewing a three-dimensional model of the real thing, particularly as some of the Danish navy’s most noted ship sculptors were not as accomplished in their design drawings of proposed figureheads as in their actual figurehead sculptures.
The model of the ELEPHANTEN’s figurehead is now the Orlogsmuseet’s principal and most dramatic icon – a Danish postage stamp featuring a representation of this figurehead has also been issued, in commemoration of the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. A model of the ELEPHANTEN’s stern galleries, detailing these galleries’ decoration, also survives in the Orlogsmuseet’s model collection. This model provides a wonderful example of the decorative scheme employed in a Danish warship’s stern galleries, and of the effect of the color scheme applied in the painting of the warship’s hull. |
| Construc. No. 44 | |
| Name: | CHRISTIANSØE |
| Type: | Frigate |
| Naval Architect: | Laurent Barbé |
| Weight: | 114 læsts |
| Armament: | 18 cannon – 4 pdr. in the main battery |
| Dimensions: | Length – 86′ Beam – 23′ Draft – 8’5″ (fore), 8′ 11″ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – September 5, 1940, Launched – April 8, 1741 |
| Crew: | 81 |
| Out of Service: | 1761 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Compare the CHRISTIANSØE’s draft to that of the frigate BLAA HEYREN (Construction No. 36), a vessel of similar size to CHRISTIANSØE, but designed by Knud Benstrup. Whereas BLAA HEYREN has a pronounced drag, or difference between her fore and aft draft, CHRISTIANSØE not only has virtually no difference between her fore and aft draft, but her draft is also shallower than BLAA HEYREN’s.Laurent Barbé, the CHRISTIANSØE’s designer, was a French emigré naval architect who came to Denmark and served as the Danish navy’s Constructor from 1740-1747, during which time Barbé designed and built 8 ships-of-the-line, 3 frigates, 1 brigantine, and one galley.During Laurent Barbé’s tenure as the Danish navy’s Constructor, or naval architect, many men serving on the Danish navy’s governing Construction Commission which supervised the design of the Danish navy’s warships, came to believe that Barbé’s professional performance fell below expectations, that Barbé’s designing methods and principles were dated, and Barbé’s professional abilities less than stellar.
As a result of the poor estimation of his professional performance or abilities, Barbé was finally dismissed from his position as the Danish navy’s Constructor in 1747. Barbé’s dismissal occurred during an overall change of leadership in the Danish navy’s administration. |
| Construc. No. 45 | |
| Name: | WENDEN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud. N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1176¼ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon: 26 – 24 pdr., 26 – 18 pdr., 18 – 8 pdr. |
| Dimensions: | Length – 169′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – April 10, 1741, Launched – September 5, 1742 |
| Crew: | 638 |
| Out of Service: | 1781 |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | NORSKE LØVE (Construction No. 37), JYLLAND (Construction No. 40), DRONNING LOVISA (Construction No. 48), and KJØBENHAVN (Construction No. 49).Notes: See the discussion, in the entry under the “Notes” section to Construction No. 37, of the basis for the presumption of the sister-ship status of the five ships built to the NORSKE LØVE’s hull dimensions and, if these ships were in fact sister-ships, the significance of the building of this class of five ships in the history of Danish naval construction.During her forty years of service life, WENDEN was only briefly commissioned on a few occasions, during the summer sailing season. For most of her service life, WENDEN was laid up “In Ordinary” at the Danish fleet naval base at Holmen. |
| Construc. No. 46 | |
| Name: | FALSTER |
| Type: | Frigate – “Cronjagten” |
| Naval Architect: | Diderich Thura |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 40 cannon: 20 – 18 pdr., 20 – 8 pdr. |
| Dimensions: | Length – 125′ Beam – 34′ Draft – 15′ (fore), 17;’ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – June 22, 1741, Launched – March 29, 1742 |
| Crew: | 307 |
| Out of Service: | 1753 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | The FALSTER was an unusual and hybrid design for a Danish naval frigate of the time, being a large two-decker, with equally large (for a Danish frigate) 18 pdr. cannon in her main battery. Both of her decks were armed with complete batteries.FALSTER was also known as the “CRON JAGTEN,” or “CROWN YACHT.”The FALSTER was accidentally destroyed by fire in the Moroccan port of Safia in 1753, while leading a squadron of Danish warships to Morocco on a diplomatic mission to negotiate a solution to the predations of Moroccan pirates on Danish commercial shipping. For further information on the frigate FALSTER’s design and accidental loss, see the articles on this website entitled (1) “The Loss of the Frigate Falster off the Coast of Morocco June 3rd, 1753;” and (2) “Fregatten Falster and Danish Frigate Design to 1746.” |
| Construc. No. 47 | |
| Name: | TRE KRONER |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1152½ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon – 24 pdr. in the main armament |
| Dimensions: | Length – 165′ 5″ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ 4″ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – July 30, 1741, Launched – September 5, 1742 |
| Crew: | 638 |
| Out of Service: | 1761 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | Knud Benstrup, the Danish navy’s Chief Master Builder from 1731 to 1736, is the naval architect who designed TRE KRONER. Unusually, the Benstrup design plans employed to build the TRE KRONER were utilized six years after the end of Benstrup’s tenure as the Danish Navy’s Chief Master Builder. |
| Construc. No. 48 | |
| Name: | DRONNING LOVISA |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1176¼ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon: 26 – 36 pdr., 26 – 18 pdr., 18 – 8 pdr. |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – April 11, 1742, Launched – December 10, 1744 |
| Crew: | 667 |
| Out of Service: | 1783 |
| Sister Ships: | NORSKE LØVE (Construction No. 37), JYLLAND (Construction No. 40), WENDEN (Construction No. 45), KJØBENHAVN (Construction No. 49) |
| Notes: | See the discussion, in the entry under the “Notes” section to Construction No. 37, of the basis for the presumption of the sister-ship status of the five ships built to the NORKSE LØVE’s hull dimensions and, if these ships were in fact sister-ships, the significance of the building of this class of five ships in the history of Danish warship construction.Ramshart asserts that DRONNING LOVISA was equipped with 36 pdr. cannon on her main battery deck – which, if true, would mean that this warship was one of the few Danish battleships in Danish naval history to have shipped 36 pdrs. to equip her main battery. DRONNING LOVISA’s sister-ships do not appear to have been armed with 36 pdrs., which seem to be a heavy weight in battery to have been shipped on the basis of DRONNING LOVISA’s relatively modest hull dimensions.If DRONNING LOVISA was actually intended to be armed with 36 pdrs. on her main gundeck, then one wonders if the DRONNING LOVISA’s hull was specially reinforced during construction, as with timber of heavier scantlings, to provide extra structural strength to accommodate these much heavier weapons.
DRONNING LOVISA only seems to have been briefly commissioned on two occasions during her nearly forty year service career, being laid up “In Ordinary” at the Danish fleet basin at Holmen for the balance of her service life. |
| Construc. No. 49 | |
| Name: | KJØBENHAVN |
| Type: | Ship-of-the-Line |
| Naval Architect: | Knud N. Benstrup |
| Weight: | 1176¼ læsts |
| Armament: | 70 cannon: 26 – 24 pdr., 26 – 18 pdr., 18 – 8 pdr. |
| Dimensions: | Length – 164′ Beam – 44′ 6″ Draft – 18′ (fore), 20′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – April 11, 1742, Launched – December 10, 1744 |
| Crew: | 633 |
| Out of Service: | 1786 |
| Sister Ships: | |
| Notes: | NORSKE LØVE (Construction No. 37), JYLLAND (Construction No. 40), WENDEN (Construction No. 45), DRONNING LOVISA (Construction No. 48)Notes: See the entry under the “Notes” section for Construction No. 48, immediately preceding this data entry re the KJØBENHAVN.During her service life of over forty years, KJØBENHAVN only appears to have been briefly commissioned on two occasions, spending the rest of her service life laid up “In Ordinary” at the fleet basin at Holmen. |
| Construc. No. 50 | |
| Name: | ÆRO |
| Type: | Brigantine |
| Naval Architect: | Laurent Barbé |
| Weight: | |
| Armament: | 10 – 4 pdr. |
| Dimensions: | Length – 70′ Beam – 19′ Draft – 8′ 8″ (fore), 10′ 6′ (aft) |
| Construction Dates: | Keel Laid – May 27, 1743, Launched – January 25, 1744 |
| Crew: | 53 |
| Out of Service: | 1767 |
| Sister Ships: | None |
| Notes: | The ÆRO is the smallest Danish warship, and the only brigantine, included in this warship list.Although four brigantines formed part of the Danish navy’s strength during the reign of the Danish king Christian VI, and all of these brigantines were built between 1736 and 1744 by the Danish navy’s official naval architects, only the brigantine ÆRO, the last of the four Danish naval brigantines to be built, was given a shipyard “construction number.”For remarks concerning the ÆRO’s designer, the French emigré naval architect Laurent Barbé, and Barbé’s tenure as the Danish navy’s Constructor, please see the “Notes” entry under “Construction No. 44” above. |
Further reading:
O. E. Holst, “En Kort Oversigt Over Skibe Byggede Paa Orlogsværftet Efter 1692. February, 1923 edition of Tidsskrift for Søvæsen.
H. G. Garde, Den Dansk-Norske Sømagts Historie, 1700-1814 (1852).
P. Ramshart, Efterretning om det bekiendte af den danske Flaades Tieneste (1808)
Hans Christian Bjerg and John Erichsen, Danske Orlogsskibe 1690-1860. Vols. I and II (1980).
P. Holck, “Danish-Norwegian Ships,” in Lists of Men-of-War 1650-1700, Vol 5 (1936)
Knud Klem, Skibsbyggeriet i Danmark og Hertugdømmerne i 1700-Årene (1985)Georg Nørregård, Fregatten Falster ved Morokko 1753 (1956)