Talk:Sea Venture

Untitled
Scott O'Dell wrote 'The Serpent Never Sleeps', and the main character went on this boat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.198.112.210 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 17 January 2006

"double-timbered"? "single-timbered"? apparently important
"...double-timbering, and she may have been the first single-timbered... ship..." Apparently this is an important point. Perhaps it is the lasting feature, in what is otherwise a historical anecdote. Could it be expanded to explain what "double-timbered" and "single-timbered" entail? Hull construction of some type, one imagines...--Wetman (talk) 01:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Bermuda: Does it depict Sea Venture?
According to this page "The coat of arms of Bermuda features a representation of the Sea Venture wreck."

But according to the page on the Coat of arms of Bermuda "The wrecked ship is that of a French ship under the command of Captain M. de la Barbotiere, not the Sea Venture, the flagship of the Virginia Company."

So which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMY1000 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I've reverted Coat of arms of Bermuda. I've no idea which ship it is, but the only source provided says it is the Sea Venture; if someone thinks it is a different ship, they need to provide a source.
 * Most sources I can find, including Britannica and at least one book in print, seem to say that it is indeed the Sea Venture.
 * One exception is the Bermuda National Library, who you might expect to know; they say that it's yet another ship, the Edward Bonaventure, in 1593. I can find very little about this ship (it mostly seems to be of interest to Oxfordians, and most of the sources I can find seem to suggest that it wasn't shipwrecked at all.... TSP (talk) 11:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Some odd content being added
There is some odd content being added to this article. The theory that the ship leaked because "Sea Venture had a critical flaw in her newness" is not consistent with proper historical study nor the archaeological evidence. The place of build as Aldeburgh is also called into serious question. I am not familiar with the sources from which this content originates, but have at hand Jonathan Adams' book A Maritime Archaeology of Ships. Adams is one of the lead authors of an interim report on the archaeology of the Sea Venture wreck site. He concludes, from the historical record, that Sea Venture was likely to have been built in 1603, which fits better with the archaeology than if the ship was brand new. I do feel that at least some of this article should be based on the readily available accounts by the noted archaeologists who have published on this wreck. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 21:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The bit about the Bermuda cedar seems somewhat dubious to me. Even if some was used in building the two ships built by the survivors, its properties were completely unknown. The article is off-topic by making any substantial mention of this timber. I note that this part of the article is unreferenced on this point. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 22:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC)