Talk:Voyage of the Glorioso

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.


  • The title of this page reads rather oddly in English. 'Battles' or 'Engagements' would be a more natural substitute for 'Combats', which rarely appears as a plural noun in English. Or something akin to 'Voyage of the Glorioso'? Anyway, I'd strongly suggest changing it to something less idiomatic.
  • There is also some conflict amongst different sources apparently over some of the details of the engagements. In the first, the Lark was under Crookshanks, but was not certainly not sunk. She was under Captain Edward Hughes at Jamaica in February 1748, before paying off in July that year, and continued in service until being sold in August 1757.
  • Other sources indicate that it was the Warwick under Erskine that was most involved in the fighting, being reduced to a wreck by fighting the larger ship unsupported, with Crookshanks hanging back. This ties in with the article's admission that Crookshanks was court-martialed and dismissed for his apparent refusal to help Erskine, and this indeed is the case. (Crookshanks was reinstated on half pay 12 years later, and spent his time bringing petty legal disputes against those he felt had mismanaged his court martial). Benea (talk) 00:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Additionally Glorioso was not broken up immediately upon arrival, but spent 6 months at Lisbon before being sold for breaking up on 13 April 1748. Benea (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I also cannot find any evidence of this third three hour-long engagement between Glorioso and Oxford, Shoreham and Falcon. Sources instead strongly indicate that they encountered her, but kept well clear, a decision that Smith Callis as senior officer aboard Oxford later faced a court-martial for, but was acquitted. Benea (talk) 01:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
  • And I'm inclined to think that this image is not necessarily meant to represent Glorioso dismasted after the battle, but rather the masts and sails have been deliberately omitted to give a clearer representation of her hull and lines. The stumps are too uniform in their height, and are too high above the deck in my opinion for this to be battle damage. Compare this model which is intended to have the same effect, or this sketch - with this or this, which show actual battle damage. Benea (talk) 01:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, I changed the title of the page to 'Voyage of the Glorioso', as is named in several accounts. Concerning to the battle against HMS Warwick and HMS Lark, it's true that there are different versions, including that of Crookshanks, which holds actually that HMS Warwick was most involved in the fighting. According to Spanish sources HMS Lark attacked followed by HMS Warwick, and both ships suffered considerable damage. The Spanish naval historian Agustín Ramón Rodríguez González argues that HMS Lark finally sank. Fernández Duro says vaguely that the frigate was bust. I’ve also referenced the engagement with HMS Oxford, HMS Shoreham and HMS Falcon. About the image, I think you're right. ElBufon (talk) 09:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


Shouldn't this be titled Glorioso (ship)? Clarityfiend (talk) 22:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Pedro Messia de la Cerda?[edit]

Just seen this pic and it looks remarkably like Sebastián de Eslava are you sure it isn't the same guy? Bruich talk, 19:49, 27 July 2010 (GMT)

Yes, the pictures represent distinct men. His likeness is due to both paintings are by the same author: Joaquín Gutiérrez. ElBufon (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh yes I can see it in the coat of arms Bruich talk, 20:08, 27 July 2010 (GMT)