ARCHITECTURE AS EVIDENCE

THE PIRATE REPUBLIC OF 1716-1725 HOSTIS HUMANI GENERES OR THE SYMPTOM OF AN EXPLOITATIVE LABOURING INDUSTRY?

FREDERICK MAWHOOD STUDENT N.O 16008735 AR7003 INTERPRETATION 24 JANUARY 2018 TUTOR: NABIL AHMED

“Damn ye, you are a sneaking puppy, and so are all those who will submit to be governed by laws which rich men have made for their own security… they vilify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference: they rob the poor under the cover of law and we plunder the rich under the cover of our own courage” Captain Samuel Bellamy (Woodard, 2015, p. 174)

ABSTRACT In this essay, I’ll be studying the eighteenth-century merchant vessel for evidence of the realities and conditions that defined the British maritime-labourer’s existence from 1716-1725; with the aim of discovering how this environment persuaded thousands of men to sail under the black flag. These ships became the international stage upon which a violent class-war endured, and through careful analysis we can not only visualise the struggles over authority and discipline that transpired within them, but also find evidence of the reorganization of space and privilege that redefined social relations on-board the pirate vessel. Over the following chapters, I aim to substantiate my claim that the golden-age pirates were a direct consequence of Britain’s maritime labouring industry, and provide evidence that we can view the campaign of demonization used to justify their extermination, not as justice, but perhaps as part of the wider context of genocide that haunted the New World during this era.

This is the story of how thousands of British sailors turned the instrument of their exploitation into a weapon of retribution.

(Stevenson, 1883) Illustration from Treasure Island

INTRODUCTION Although piracy has existed for thousands of years, it was between 1716 and 1725 that “the world experienced the most intense outbreak of seaborne banditry ever recorded” (Elleman, 2015, p. 15). During this ‘golden-age’, almost 5000 pirates caused havoc across the Atlantic system, capturing and plundering hundreds of merchant vessels and disrupting imperial trade routes. Although pirate ships of this period were multi-ethnic, it’s been observed that almost half of the goldenage pirates (47.4 percent) were of British descent, and almost all recruits came from “captured merchantmen as volunteers” (Rediker, 1989, p. 258). For a time, their enterprise was so successful it was declared, “unless something effectual and immediate be done, the whole trade from Great Britain to the New World will be lost” (Woodard, 2015, p. 166). Nonetheless, with their source of enormous wealth and renewed imperial power under threat, the British Government launched a campaign of demonization and military violence that would see approximately half of these pirates ‘launched into eternity’.

However, when we examine the motivations that impelled sailors of this period to ‘go upon the account’, we don’t necessarily uncover the black-and-white villains of eighteenth-century rhetoric, but rather a group of disenfranchised proletarians, struggling to escape the violent, disciplinary regime of a maritime labouring industry, where “a rich and powerful minority, governed and dictated the existence of a largely powerless labouring class” (Evans, 2013, p. 62).

(Mawhood, 2018)

THE GOOSE & THE COMMON 5 GOING TO SEA

“They hang the man and flog the woman Who steals the goose from off the common But let the greater criminal loose Who steals the common from the goose” Eighteenth-Century Protest (Rediker, 1989, p. 17) In early eighteenth-century England, half the population was “living below the level of subsistence” (Woodard, 2015, p. 30).

The old economic system of feudalism was being replaced with capitalism, and the peasant farmers were affected most. Under multiple enclosure acts, “fields, farms and commons were seized by feudal lords and enclosed with walls, fences and hedgerows”, turning “millions of farmers into landless paupers” (2015, p. 29).

Thousands found themselves “suddenly and forcibly torn from their means of subsistence” and launched onto a labour market “as free, unprotected, and right-less proletarians” (Rediker, 1989, p. 16). Seeking refuge from the social and economic catastrophe engulfing the countryside, masses of young men flocked to the cities in search of a better life. Considering almost all golden-age pirates came from “the lowest of social classes” (Fox, 2015, p. 23), it stands to reason that this would have been the beginning of many a British sailor’s journey into piracy.

(Cruikshank, 1829) Enclosing the fields of Hampstead

(Unknown, 1780) Depiction of an eighteenth-century Press Gang

Nevertheless, extreme hardship would have shaped a life on land, so as the young ‘Jack-tar’ sailed down the Thames and watched Gravesend disappear behind him, he may have been hopeful that a better future awaited at sea. However, he would soon discover why sailors thought Gravesend “a right name”, “as every-body of sailors knows, it being where many never return again” (Rediker, 1989, p. 31).

6 GOING TO SEA

In the 1700’s, London was the centre of commerce and trade in Britain’s growing empire. It was also her greatest port, and with an expanding fleet, professional seamen were always in short supply. A common saying among experienced sailors was, “those who go to sea for pleasure would go to hell as a pastime” (Woodard, 2015, p. 36), but the masters of both merchant vessels and Royal Navy warships evolved numerous strategies to lure men into their service. The merchant captain employed the skills of the ‘spirit’ or the ‘crimp’ to fill his vessel.

‘Spirits’, haunted inns and taverns, looking to “entice any who they think are country people or strangers”, promising “high wages and advances of money if they signed on the dotted line” (Rediker, 1989, p. 81). ‘Crimps’ attempted to persuade drunk or indebted seamen, “in exchange for drinks or the payment of their debts”, often “handcuffing and kidnapping drunken sailors” (1989, p. 82) before selling them onto vessels.

The Royal Navy offered “two month’s advance pay to any who would sign up” (Woodard, 2015, p. 36), but due to a lack of interest resorted to ‘impressment’ to fill their warships. Led by a naval officer, these ‘press gangs’ “broke into homes and boarding houses in the middle of the night” and “stalked the streets, rounding up any destitute they came across with clubs” (2015, p. 37). Unfortunately, “almost half of those pressed in the eighteenth-century would die at sea” (2015, p. 43), and thousands of families would starve as a result. Jesse Lemisch, states that a primary function of maritime law was “to assure a ready supply of cheap, docile labour” (Rediker, 2004, p. 43), and once on-board, the recruit was legally bound to serve the vessel until it completed a voyage that could last years.

7 GOING TO SEA (Hogarth, 1751) Etchings depicting the effects of alchohol and poverty in London

ARCHITECTURE AS EVIDENCE

THE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY MERCHANT VESSEL

(Chapman, 1768) Drawings showing the arrangement of a typical merchant vessel

Officer Cabins

Sailor’s Quarters

Captain’s Quarters

ARCHITECTURE AS EVIDENCE

THE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY MERCHANT VESSEL

(Renner, 1987) Reconstructed deck plans of HMS Dispatch 1779

BETWEEN THE DEVIL & TH E DEEP BLUE SEA 13 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

The eighteenth-century merchant vessel was an early experiment in the industrial labour process. Workers were “confined within an enclosed setting to perform a collective set of tasks”, under the scrutiny of a captain who “had absolute authority, and could make life tolerable or unbearable as he wished” (Rediker, 1989, p. 83). It was this measured control over discipline, health, and social life that would shape the sailor’s maritime world.

“There was the pox above-board, the plague between decks, hell in the forecastle, and the devil at the helm” Sailor’s Lament (Rediker, 2004, p. 58) The ship was predicated on a strict hierarchy of power, which outlined the wages and responsibilities of all crewmembers, and allocated living accommodations relative to status. The captain’s quarters were located on the upper deck, and usually comprised of multiple compartments for living, dining and sleeping. Not only was his personal accommodation around ten times the square footage of the average sailor’s, it was also the lightest and airiest part of the ship, ventilated via skylights and the stern windows. Officers were only permitted entry when summoned, and the chamber’s enclosed nature intentionally isolated him from the everyday activities of sailing the vessel, “for as the Jove of this Aquatic Olympus he lives most of his sea life in his Great Cabbinn in the stern” (Renner, 1987, p.

32). Plush surroundings further reinforced his importance, and contemporary excavations substantiate accounts of extravagant furnishings; “the ship certainly was in a sad plight, but Mr. Douglas’s cabin was an exception to the general filth… painted a light pea green, with gold beading; the bed and curtains of the richest Madras chints… three mahogany chairs… and the most complete dressing-tables I ever saw” (1987, p. 34).

Officers were allocated a private space ‘befitting’ of their rank, with bulkheads and curtains used to sub-divide permanent compartments. However, the rest of the crew were not so fortunate; “when you look down from the quarter-deck, you see the utmost extremity of human misery: such crowding,

(Renner, 1987) Mahogany chair arms found in the captain’s chamber of HMS Dispatch

(Renner, 1987) Sculpted brassware found in the captain’s chamber of HMS Dispatch

14 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

such filth, such stench” (1987, p. 64). Crammed into a single cabin in the bow, “where the movement of the vessel was most violent”, sailors slept together in densely packed hammocks slung in “nooks and crannies” (Woodard, 2015, p. 41). The poorly ventilated space “reeked of bilge water and unwashed flesh”, and was a place of “vomiting, fever, dysentery, scurvy, cancer and mouth rot” where “many die miserably” (2015, p.

42). A report by the Royal Commission in 1853 showed that conditions still hadn’t improved; “in British ships the men are not treated as they ought to be… with particular notice to their place of abode, which is in almost every ship a small dark cave, without light or warmth” (Renner, 1987, p. 63). Due to the communality of their arrangement, disease was also omnipresent, with lice, rats and cockroaches “swarming the vessel, spreading diseases like typhus, typhoid, and the plague” (Woodard, 2015, p. 42). The ship had become a microcosm of landed-society, and far from offering the sailor respite, only served to emphasise the inequalities he’d hoped to escape.

15 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

Despite contributing the labour required for a profitable journey, the sailor’s salary didn’t reflect the dangers of his work; “the chances of a seaman ending his life in a catastrophe were high… many a man fell from the rigging, was washed overboard, or fatally struck by falling gear” (Rediker, 1989, p. 93). Demanding both cooperation and interdependence, the labour process consisted of two fundamentals, handling the cargo and handling the ship. At sea, his primary function was to work the sails, manage the rigging, and steer the ship, but additional ‘shadow work’ such as “coiling ropes, mending canvas and holystoning the deck” (1989, p. 95) made the daily toil perpetual. Work was often undertaken in extreme conditions, and numerous accounts are given of “bursted bellies, broken limbs and severed fingers” (Woodard, 2015, p. 40). However, there remained a far greater threat to the sailor… “the unrestricted power of the captain to treat his men with the utmost cruelty without redress” (Rediker, 1989, p. 212).

“There is no justice or injustice on-board ship, my lad.

There are only two things: duty and mutiny... All that you are ordered to do is duty. All that you refuse to do is mutiny” Unknown Early-Eighteenth-Century Mariner (1989, p. 211) There was no respite for the sailor. His every movement was under constant observation, and judging his performance was a captain whose concept of discipline could easily become an abuse of power. Under maritime law, ‘moderate punishment’ was deemed acceptable, but the unchecked nature of the captain’s legal powers fostered a culture of “class discipline at its most personal and sadistic” (1989, p. 93). The sailor had few rights to defend himself with, and “were not permitted to interfere when ship’s officers confined or punished one of the crew”. Furthermore, “if a sailor be disobedient, mutinous, or desert the ship, he makes a total forfeiture of his wages” (1989, p. 238), so submission was his only option. In this way masters routinely pushed their crews to the limit, “bullying, threatening, or assigning particularly dangerous tasks to settle personal grudges” (1989, p. 217). One of the main tools of ‘discipline’ was

(Hogarth, 1751) Officer pointing to a gibbet, while another holds up a cat-o-nine-tails

16 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

the cat-of-nine-tails, a multi-tailed whip used in public displays of authority for as little as ‘irregular steering’, but captains were known to use canes, ropes, belts, sticks and even “an elephant’s dry’d pizle” (Evans, 2013, p. 49). A special ‘market day’ was even set aside for particularly severe punishments, and accounts describe the quarterdeck as resembling a “slaughterhouse by noon” (Rediker, 1989, p. 213). The admiralty records are full of cases of excessive violence made between 1700 and 1750, with four in every five of these charges filed between 1715 and 1730 (1989, p. 215), but the levels of barbarity can be astonishing. One particularly sadistic captain had his cabin boy “whipped several times in a very cruel manner” (Woodard, 2015, p. 42), before pouring pickled brine into the wounds. He then tied the child to the mast for nine days, before treading “up and down over his body”, and “stamping upon his breast so violently that excrement came involuntarily from him… being forced several times down his throat”. After eighteen days of whipping, his body was described “as many colours as the rainbow… with flesh in many places like jelly” (2015, p. 43).

Although impossible to ascertain exactly how many sailors were abused between 1716 and 1725, cases like this show us violence was an established part of social relations at sea.

17 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

“Pursor, steward, mate, all three I wish them hang’d upon a tree” John Baltharpe (Rediker, 1989, p. 127) Shipmasters also evolved strategies to help themselves maximise profits, the most prevalent being the deliberate understocking of the ships food supply; “merchants… in England will put no more victuals or drink in the ship than will serve so many days and if they must be any longer the poor men’s bellies must be pinched for it” (1989, p. 143). Although prescribed by law to provide “good food and living conditions”, withholding supplies was a popular disciplinary measure, and sailors often reported being “used very barbarously in their diet” (1989, p. 222). In addition, the ships course could always be altered “in any way the master and merchant should think most advantageous”, and one sailor complained in 1723 that his voyage had been changed so many times he “despairs of ever seeing his country or relations again” (1989, p. 138). Even lucky sailors who survived their contractual obligation rarely received their due wages. They could be paid in “colonial currencies worth 25% of pounds sterling” or receive an ‘IOU’ from the government which would be “honoured at some unspecified time in the future” (Woodard, 2015, p. 44) or could be sold immediately at a fraction of its value. It was also customary to dock wages if goods had been damaged in transit, with sailors “many times losing more in a moment than they can get again, maybe in all their lifetime” (Rediker, 1989, p. 145).

“And thus, a poor man is abused with proud and ambitious masters, finding no recompense, having no money to try the law” Edward Barlow (1989, p. 240) Despite being the world’s leading maritime nation, Britain was known as “the worst kingdom in Christendom for poor seamen” (1989, p. 145). Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea, the seaman was abused and exploited in the process of capital accumulation; however, within this space lay the core values of anti-authoritarianism and egalitarianism that would

(Trieux, 1723) Round Robin document used by sailors to organise a mutiny

18 T HE MERCHAN T SHIP

shape the foundations of pirate society. Between 1715 and 1730 there were forty-eight documented mutinies on British voyages to the West Indies (1989, p. 228), and thousands more labourers would desert their ships at ports across the colonies. It was here that thousands of British sailors chose to renounce their nationality and sail under a new flag.

T H E NEW G O V E RNA NCE OF T HE S HI P 19 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

“In the merchant service there is thin commons, low wages, and hard labour; in this, plenty and satiety, liberty and power, and who would not balance creditor on this side, when all the hazard that is run for it, at worst, is only a sower look or two at choking. No, a merry life and a short one, shall be my motto” Captain Bartholomew Roberts (Rediker, 2004, p. 10) The golden-age pirate ship was a world turned upside-down.

Under ‘the banner of King Death’ sailors constructed “the most democratic institution of the eighteenth-century” (Kuhn, 2010, p. 83), and transformed the instrument of their exploitation into a weapon of retribution. Years of serving a system of hierarchy and privilege had taught them the importance of liberty, equality and brotherhood, and these values were articulated through a determined redistribution of power, and the careful rearrangement of their physical surroundings.

“They permit him to be captain, on condition, that they may be captain over him” (Defoe, 1724, p. 213) Recognising that an uneven distribution of power can lead to exploitation, the captain’s authority was dramatically reduced.

“Excepting in an engagement, when he commanded absolutely and without control” (Rediker, 2004, p. 42), he held little more than the title, receiving “no more food than another man” and only “fifty percent more plunder than his crew” (Woodard, 2015, p.

132). Another important step towards achieving affinity between the crew, was to reduce the potential for spatial segregation; “the upper work on a pirate ship was often removed to eliminate class differences” (Kuhn, 2010, p. 88). Whereas the merchant captain’s quarters were off-limits to sailors, the pirate captain “couldn’t keep his cabin to himself” (Rediker, 2004, p. 65), and was often denied extravagant furnishings; “there was neither bed, nor chair, or anything else to sit upon… only a carpet was spread on the deck, upon which we sat down cross-legg’d” (Sanders, 2007, p.

37). Whilst he could enjoy certain luxuries such as “parcels of plate and china”, equally “every man, as the humour takes him, will use the plate and china, intrude into his apartment, swear at

(Ferris, 1718) Blackbeard’s last stand after being ambushed by Lieutenant Robert Maynard

him, seize a part of his victuals and drink… without his offering to find fault or contest it” (Defoe, 1724, p. 234).

20

“On accepting the office, he was led into the cabin in state, and placed at a table, where only one chair is set at the upper end, and one at the lower end for the company’s quarter-master” (Thomas, 1836, p. 201).

T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

Counterbalancing the captain’s authority was the quartermaster; “the captain can undertake nothing which the quarter-master does not approve… we may say he is a humble imitation of the Roman Tribune of the people” (Rediker, 2004, p. 66). It was the quartermaster’s job to “have the general inspection of all affairs” (2004, p. 66) and ensure that the ‘articles of agreement’, drawn up by the men, were followed and executed appropriately. These written documents were the lifeblood of pirate society, dictating the terms for allocating authority, enforcing discipline, dividing plunder, and distributing foodstuffs. Although each ship ran by its own code, the different versions that exist are so similar they’ve been taken as evidence of a “common golden-age pirate culture” (Kuhn, 2010, p. 89), reinforcing my argument that their society was born from mutual experience; “like the citizens of any commonwealth, they shared a general understanding of what was acceptable and unacceptable behaviour” (2010, p.

88). As well as overlooking the cook, “to see the provisions are equally distributed to each mess” (Rediker, 2004, p. 73), the quartermaster was also the custodian of ‘the common chest’, keeping a book to ensure that everyone’s share was accounted for. Because of his trusted position, he often became the captain of a new vessel, and this process helped to institutionalise goldenage customs and meanings, transmitting them from ship to ship.

“The enjoyment of posts aboard the pirate ships are very precarious, depending wholly upon the will and pleasure of the crew” Naval Captain Humphrey Orme (2004, p. 70) The highest authority belonged to ‘the common council’, which met regularly and included every member of the crew. Its primary

21 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L (Defoe, 1724) The articles of Captain George Lowther and his crew, typical of others at the time

function was to discuss decisions that would affect the crew’s welfare in an open meeting; for example, the punishment of offenses and election of officers. These decisions were carried “by a majority of votes” (2004, p. 69), and not even the most audacious captain would challenge its rule, capital punishment being most commonly “invoked to punish a captain who had

22 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

(Rediker, 1989) Connections between the golden-age pirate crews and dissemination of culture

abused his authority” (2004, p. 76). Shipboard democracy was exhilarating for men who’d laboured inside a totalitarian work environment, and one captured merchantman claimed the council met so often that “all the pyrate’s affairs being carried by that”, with “so little government or subordination that they are on occasion, all captains” (2004, p. 69). This levelling of

23 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

inequalities also extended to the sailor’s spatial relationship with the vessel. No longer was he restricted in his movements, but able to roam wherever he wanted; “the deck is spread with mats to lie on each night… every man has one or two; and this with a pillow for the head and a rug for a covering” (Little, 2007, p. 17).

“Pyrates, are princes to seamen… these hostes humani generis as great robbers as they are to all besides, are precisely just among themselves” Barnaby Slush Sea Cook (Rediker, 2004, p. 60) Pirates only engaged in military action as a “repulsive necessity” (2004, p. 14), instead relying on intimidation to frighten their opponents into submission. This method was largely successful, and numerous merchant captains recounted that “up goe the pirate colours… our men will defend their ship no longer” (2004, p. 14). This was partly because sailors knew any attempted resistance would be severely punished; however, pirates also recognised that the average seamen would be reluctant to risk his life protecting the property of an abusive captain. First onboard, the quartermaster would assume control of the prize, touring the vessel to decide “what he thinks fit for the company’s use” (2004, p. 67) and orchestrating its movement from one ship to the other. He would then proceed to ask the captured sailors if anyone wished to join them, and was usually rewarded with several volunteers, eager to escape the merchant service.

In fact, pirates were so successful in recruiting merchant’s sailors that the Governor of Virginia declared, “I fear they will soon multiply, for so many are willing to join with them… though they will force no man into their service” (2004, p. 47).

“Ah, Captain Skinner! Is it you? The only man I wished to see; I am much in your debt, and now I shall pay you in your own coin” (Defoe, 1724, p. 114) Nonetheless, perhaps the strongest evidence of power redistribution is observed in the customary ‘distribution of justice’. Pirates had justifiable contempt for merchant captains, and would hold an open forum on the main deck to investigate

24 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

(Unknown, 1748) The ‘distibution of justice’ upon Captain Skinner

the masters ‘usage’ of his men. The captured sailors would be called to witness, and the pirates would “enquire into the manner of the commander’s behaviour to the men” (Rediker, 2004, p.

86). Captains, who mistreated their crew, would be ‘whipp’d and pickled’, and those found to have committed more heinous crimes would receive more severe recriminations; “between decks they stick candles round the mizzen-mast… men surround it with points of swords in each of their hands. The culprit enters the circle; the violin plays a merry jig; and he must run for about ten minutes, while each man runs his instrument into his posteriors” (Defoe, 1724, p. 412). Numerous pirates would use the opportunity to settle old scores; for example, upon sight of ‘Captain Skinner’, who’d previously “refused them their wages”, his old boatswain; “immediately laid hold of the captain, and made him fast to the windless”, pelted him “with glass bottles, which cut him in a sad manner”, “whipped him about the deck”, and finally “shot him thro’ the head” (Defoe, 1724, p. 114-115).

Many captains reported being ‘barbarously used’ and some were executed; however, pirates considered themselves to be “honest fellows” (Rediker, 2004, p. 92), and masters like ‘Captain Snelgrave’ whose men attested to his “generous character”, were “kindly used”; “they were as kind to me, as they had been at first

25 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

severe” (2004, p. 88). Snelgrave was even gifted a “captured ship with full cargo”, so he might “return with a large sum of money to London, and bid the merchants defiance” (2004, p. 88).

Thus, the vessel that once bore witness to his exploitation, now served the sailor as a tribunal. The ship was transformed into a ‘floating courtroom’ where masters would stand trial before their men; captured sailors acted as the prosecution, shipmasters as their own defence, and ‘the common council’ functioned as the jury, administering crude-justice on their captive’s behalf. However, these pirates would soon find themselves hunted down by the British Government, and put on trial for their own crimes… on the “hastily constructed scaffolds of port-city gallows” (2004, p. 6).

(Garneray, 1811) Painting of a pirate ship boarding a merchant vessel

(Defoe, 1724) Illustration of Edward Teach (Blackbeard) in ‘A General History of the Pyrates’

26 T HE PIR ATE VESSE L

MOCK COURT OF JUDICATURE TO

TRY ANOTHER FOR PYRACY Judge: Hearkee me, you lousy pitiful, ill-look’d dog; what have you to say why you should not be tuck’d up immediately, and set a sun-drying like a scare-crow? Are you guilty, or not guilty?

Prisoner: Not guilty, an’t please your worship.

Judge: Not guilty! Say so again, and I’ll have you hang’d without any trial.

Prisoner: An’t please your worship’s honour, my lord, I am as honest a poor fellow as ever went between stern and stern of a ship; but I was taken by a notorious pyrate, a sad rogue as ever was un-hang’d, and he forced me, an’t please your honour.

Judge: Answer me, how will you be tried?

Prisoner: By G- and my country.

Judge: The devil you will – why then gentlemen of the dury, I think we have nothing to do but to proceed to judgment.

Attorney General: Right, my lord; for if the fellow should be suffer’d to speak, he may clear himself, and that’s an affront to the court.

Prisoner: Pray, my lord, I hope your lordship will consider…

Judge: Consider! How dare you talk of considering? I never consider’d in all my life. I’ll make it treason to consider.

Prisoner: But, I hope, your Lordship will hear some reason.

Judge: D’ye hear how the scoundrel prates? What have we to do with reason raskal? We don’t sit here to bear reason – we go according to law – is our dinner ready?

Attorney General: Yes, my lord.

Judge: Then hear me raskal, you must suffer for three reasons: First it is not fit I should sit here and judge, and nobody be hanged – Secondly you have a damn’d hanging look – And thirdly, you must be hang’d because I am hungry.

TO EXTIRPATE THEM FROM THIS WORLD

“Their robberies and piracies are born out of an immoderate, inordinate, irregular desire of worldly possessions” Cotton Mather Puritan Minister (2004, p. 134) One of the major sins attributed to golden-age pirates was greed; “driven to plunder by a craving appetite, and an insatiable thirst after inordinate gain” (2004, p. 133). At a time when 75% of Britain’s wealth was enjoyed by 20% of the population (Hoffman, 2002, p. 345), the irony is palpable. This accusation, directed towards sailors who’d once belonged to Britain’s (Mawhood, 2018) The mock trial performed by the crew of Thomas Anftis

28 TO C LEANSE T HE SE AS

Captain Anftis and his crew were not satirizing an abstract possibility. British merchants had been protesting their losses for decades, and in 1700 the British Parliament passed ‘an act for the more effectual suppression of piracy’, allowing convicts to be “examined, tried, and adjudged in any place at sea, or in any of his majesty’s colonies” (Marley, 2012, p. 196). More importantly, the trial no longer had to be conducted by an official court-of-law. ‘Justice’ could now be voted by a ‘Court of Seven’, and could include any combination of “known merchants, factors, planters, captains, lieutenants, or warrant officers” (2012, p. 198). Not only could British pirates be tried almost immediately and anywhere, their fate was now determined by a biased court represented by the very systems of authority they’d been rebelling against. At a time when “poor men and women often went to the gallows for stealing a few pence” (Sherry, 2008, p. 48), few would contest the use of capital punishment for men who’d rebelled against the state, and from 1716-1725 at least 600 pirates (Rediker, 2004, p. 162) were hanged, hundreds more dying in battle or in prison. In 1718, the attorney general of South Carolina declared that “piracy is a crime so odious and horrid… we have been at loss for words to stamp a sufficient ignominy upon it” (2004, p. 129). However, a campaign of lurid propaganda to ‘cleanse the seas’, undertaken

by Britain’s ruling classes, would gradually manufacture an image of the pirate that would legitimize his annihilation.

29 TO C LEANSE T HE SE AS

exploited proletarian class, was being made by the bourgeoisie profiting from the violent processes of dispossession and capital accumulation in the New World. Whilst pirates did attack merchant vessels for their own gain, the resources they chiefly sought out were “commodities that would enable them to maintain their ships and sustain their way of life” (Kuhn, 2010, p.

41). For example, in 1718 Edward Teach blockaded Charleston Harbour and held the town to ransom, his only request being a “chest containing medicines with a value of about £400” (Woodard, 2015, p. 251). Freedom was more important than wealth accumulation, and they were known as prolific spenders, “buying lavish dinners and frequenting the pubs and brothels” (Jacque, 2007, p. 16) whenever they came ashore. For most, a life of piracy was simply a struggle for life against a socially controlled death, and many convicts would echo the defence William Scott gave at his trial when he stated, “what I did, was to keep me from perishing” (Rediker, 2004, p. 154). As one resident of Port Royal would later claim, “resentment and the want of employ were certainly the motives to a course of life many of them would not have taken up, could they by any lawful mean have supported themselves” (Woodard, 2015, p. 87).

“This sort of criminals are engag’d in a perpetual war with every individual… no faith, promise, nor oath is to be observed” John Valentine Advocate General (Rediker, 2004, p. 128) Piracy was harming the “wealth, strength, reputation and glory of the English nation” (2004, p. 129), and the primary targets were merchants; “whose indefatigable industry nourishes every member” (2004, p. 134). Wealthy traders, “the most useful and beneficial to the publick” (2004, p. 134), were portrayed as innocent victims, and pirates became the enemies of every law-abiding citizen. However, many didn’t share this judgment. Navigation acts passed by the British Government, imposed severe restrictions on international trade, preventing her colonies from trading with other nations and allowing the State to apply heavy tax duties on commodities, the revenue going directly to England. As such, many American colonists

(Unknown, 1725) The hanging of Stede Bonnet

30 TO C LEANSE T HE SE AS

welcomed the opportunity to trade with pirates, who would “scatter their gold and silver about with so generous a hand that their appearance soon came to be welcomed by the trading classes” (Jacque, 2007, p. 16). Pirates themselves even explained in 1718 that without the support of merchants in Rhode Island, New York, and Pennsylvania, “they could never have become so formidable” (Woodard, 2015, p. 140).

This attitude also extended to the public hangings, and during the build up to Stede Bonnet’s trial, Charleston “churned with tension”, with “rioting by night, threats of burning the town, and the intimidation of officers of the law” (Rediker, 2004, p. 100). As Governor Hope would later state in a letter to his superiors, “I am sorry to say it; but many people do not look upon these monsters with that abhorrence which they ought to do” (2004, p. 100).

31 TO C LEANSE T HE SE AS

“What a fearful state and condition a state of sin is: a state of nature which is a state of wrath” Benjamin Colman Pastor (2004, p. 132) Newspapers never tired of reporting the ‘unheard barbarities’ of piracy. Pirates were portrayed as wild and savage beasts, “full of malice, rage, and blood”, and demonised as “sons of violence” who travelled “the way of wicked men” (2004, p. 132-133).

Golden-age piracy was indeed violent, but as we’ve seen their violence was a response to the violence perpetrated against them by the State, and directed at those they held responsible.

While there were brutal pirate captains such as Philip Roche, who murdered “thirty-seven masters of vessels” (2004, p. 171), almost all violent captains appeared from 1722-1726 when they were fighting for their lives. It’s also worth noting that many of the ‘atrocities’ they were condemned for have no historical bearing; for example, one newspaper reported an “all-mulatto band of sea robbers marauding the Caribbean, eating the hearts of captured white men” (Linebaugh, 2000, p. 166). In fact, the theatricality of the public execution was primarily used, not as a tool for justice, but as a way of instilling terror into pirate sympathises through the medium of violence. As gibbeted corpses became an increasingly common sight in port cities, the number of merchants willing to trade with pirates, and sailors willing to join them decreased dramatically. However, instead of renouncing their evil ways in the face of death, numerous pirates instead used their last words to condemn the violent practices of Britain’s maritime-labouring industry; “masters of vessels might take warning and pay sailors their wages when due, and to treat them better… their barbarity made so many turn pyrate” (Rediker, 2004, p. 2). Whilst their rebellion would ultimately fail, sailors would continue to fight for better working-conditions throughout the eighteenth-century, and its testament to their enduring legacy that the British sailor would go on to “invent the strike during a wage dispute in 1768” (Rediker, 1989, p. 110).

“Sea-monsters, who have been the terror of them that haunt the sea” Cotton Mather (Rediker, 2004, p. 130)

32 TO C LEANSE T HE SE AS

The open-sea was still a mysterious place of untold dangers, and this gave the British media ample freedom to construct a hyperbolic caricature of the pirate that would serve their cause.

Writers stripped them of human characteristics, declaring that “the name of men they do not deserve”, depicting them along the lines of “blood-lusting monsters, merciless demons, sea wolves and hellhounds” (2004, p. 130). Ordinary sailors were already perceived as a ‘breed apart’ from English society, “their manner of living, speaking, acting, dressing and behaving are so peculiar to themselves” (Evans, 2014, p.33), so few would question the legitimacy of claims made against their villainous counterparts. Their isolation from the principal institutions of early modern life was also used against them, and they were declared enemies of Christianity, “children of the wicked one… led captive by him to do his will” (Rediker, 2004, p. 132). Very few sailors, and even fewer pirates were spiritual, and faced with the omnipresent dangers of seafaring most subordinated their religious preferences in favour of practical application; “a man of the sea trusts much more to the sun for his guide, than to the creator of it” (Rediker, 1989, p. 179). Thus, by “absenting themselves from the public worship of God” (Rediker, 2004, p. 133), pirates were considered heathens, and for a strongly Christian nation this was almost reason enough to justify their eradication. Their villainization was complete, and when the King’s attorney declared that “no pirate can claim the benefit of no law; he is denied common humanity and the very rights of nature” (2004, p. 146), no-one questioned his judgment. The golden-age pirate’s fate was sealed.

WAS IT JUSTICE OR WAS IT GE NOCIDE? 33 C ONC LUSION

By using the deep-sea sailing vessel as evidence, we’ve been able to deconstruct the pirate of eighteenth-century rhetoric, and expose the injustices forced upon Britain’s seafaring proletarian.

Through the process of dispossession, thousands were mobilised into Britain’s growing merchant shipping industry, and there they found themselves ruthlessly exploited by a ruling class, concerned only with capital accumulation. The British sailor was stripped of his human rights, and expected to labour in an environment designed to actively promote his discrimination, and enhance the power of those he served. In contrast, the golden-age pirate vessel became the scene of his liberation, and sailors were able to construct an alternative reality, where power was redistributed fairly, and spatial segregation reduced. The instrument of his exploitation had become a tool of retribution, and by attacking Britain’s shipping industry pirates declared themselves at war with the systems of authority that had abused them. When we analyse the language of dehumanisation used against them, we observe the biased dialect of Britain’s eighteenth-century judicial system, and it becomes clear that the campaign to ‘cleanse the seas’ was an attempt to justify an unequal society. I believe we can read the pirate rebellion of 1716-1725 as a fight against social injustice, and consider their struggle a class-war, one that would lay the foundations for future colonial revolts that would erupt across the New World. I claim that the golden-age pirates were not hostis humani generes, but merely a symptom of an exploitative maritime labouring industry… and that the British Government’s response can be viewed, not as justice, but as an act of genocide towards an oppressed proletarian class.

“Every generation gets the pirates it deserves” Robert Ignatius Burns (Kuhn, 2010, p. 156)

(Ellms, 1837) The body of William Kidd, executed just when the laws on privateering changed

34 C ONC LUSION

Brooks, B. (2016) Proprietaries, Privateers and Pirates. MAthesis.

East Carolina University. Available at: http://thescholarship. ecu.edu/bitstream/handle/10342/5349/BROOKSMASTERSTHESIS-2016.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (Accessed 9 November 2017).

Chapman, F. (2006) Architectura Navalis Mercatoria. New York: Dover Publications.

35

Defoe, D. (1724) A General History of the Pyrates. London: Charles Rivington.

BI BL IO GR A PH Y

Elleman, B. (2015) ‘Historical Piracy and its Impact’, in Bruinsma, G. (ed.) Histories of Transnational Crime. New York: Springer, pp. 9-18.

Elleman, B., Forbes, A. and Rosenberg, D. (eds.) (2010) Piracy and Maritime Crime. Newport: Naval War College Press.

Evans, D. (2014) The Radical and Alternative Society of the Golden Age Pirate. MA thesis. Manchester University. Available at: https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/593741/1/Piracy%20Thesis%20 -%20MA%20Final.pdf (Accessed 8 November 2017).

Felson, D. and Kalaitzidis, A. (2005) ‘A Historical Overview of Transnational Crime’, in Reichel, P. (ed.) Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice. California: Sage Publications, pp. 3-19.

Fox, E. (2013) Pirate Articles and their Society. PhD thesis.

University of Exeter. Available at: https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/ repository/handle/10871/14872 (Accessed 8 November 2017).

Hoffman, P., Jacks, D., Levin, P. and Lindert, P. (2002) ‘Real Inequality in Europe since 1500’, Journal of Economic History, 62(2), pp. 322-355.

Jacque, B. (2007) Piracy in a Mercantilist Society. PhD thesis.

Western Oregon University. Available at: http://www.wou. edu/history/files/2015/08/Brian-Jacque.pdf (Accessed: 12 November 2017).

Jones, O. (2011) Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class. London: Verso Books.

Kuhn, G. (2010) Life Under the Jolly Roger: Reflections on Golden Age Piracy. Oakland: PM Press.

Linebaugh, P. (2006) The London Hanged. 2nd edn. London: Verso Books.

Linebaugh, P. and Rediker, M. (2000) The Many Headed Hydra.

Boston: Beacon Press.

Little, B. (2007) The Buccaneer’s Realm. Washington: Potamoc Books.

Marley, D. (2012) Daily Life of Pirates. Connecticut: Greenwood.

Rediker, M. (1989) Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rediker, M. (2004) Villains of all Nations: Atlantic Pirates in the Golden Age. London: Verso Books.

Renner, M. (1987) Eighteenth-Century Merchant Ship Interiors.

MA thesis. Texas A&M University. Available at: http://nautarch. tamu.edu/pdf-files/Renner-MA1987.pdf (Accessed 3 January 2018).

Sanders, R. (2007) If a Pirate I must be. New York: Skyhorse Publishing.

Schmitt, C. (2006) The Nomos of the Earth. New York: Telos Press Publishing.

Sherry, F. (2008) Raiders and Rebels: A History of the Golden Age of Piracy. New York: Harper Perennial.

Thomas, R. (1836) An Authentic Account of the most Remarkable Events. New York: Erza Strong.

Woodard, C. (2014) The Republic of Pirates. London: Pan Books.

BI BL IO GR A PH Y

Moses, A. (2010) ‘Raphael Lemkin, Culture, and the Concept of Genocide’, in Bloxham, D. and Moses, A. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 19-41.

36

Chapman, F. (1768) Architectura Stockholm: Holmiae, p. 31, illus.

Navalis

Mercatoria.

Cruikshank, G. (1829) The March of Bricks and Mortar [Etching].

Available at: http://www.branchcollective.org/?attachment_ id=2411 (Accessed: 10 January 2018).

37

Defoe, D. (1724) A General History of the Pyrates. London: Charles Rivington, p. 70, illus.

I MAG E SOURCES

Defoe, D. (1724) A General History of the Pyrates. London: Charles Rivington, p. 353, illus.

Ellms, C. (1837) The Body of William Kidd [Drawing]. Available at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/executioncaptain-kidd (Accessed: 20 January 2018).

Ferris, J. (1718) Capture of the Pirate Blackbeard [Painting].

Available at: https://www.redwoodlibrary.org/blog/redwoodstaff/2016/06/02/thomas-tew-and-pirate-utopia-libertatia (Accessed: 19 January 2018).

Garneray, A. (1811) Pirate Ship Boarding a Merchant Vessel [Painting]. Available at: https://publicdomainreview. org/2014/10/01/piracy-at-the-old-bailey/ (Accessed: 20 January 2018).

Hogarth, W. (1751) Gin Lane & Beer Street [Etching]. Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/hogarth-gin-lane-t01799 (Accessed: 12 January 2018).

Hogarth, W. (1751) The Idle Apprentice goes to Sea [Etching].

Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/ exhibition/hogarth/hogarth-hogarths-modern-moral-series/ hogarth-hogarths-3 (Accessed: 12 January 2018).

Mawhood, F. (2018) Colonial Trade Network [Poster].

Mawhood, F. (2018) Mock Court to Try Another for Pyracy [Poster].

Rediker, M. (1989) Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 268, illus.

Renner, M. (1987) Eighteenth-Century Merchant Ship Interiors.

Texas A&M University, p. 12, illus.

Renner, M. (1987) Eighteenth-Century Merchant Ship Interiors.

Texas A&M University, p. 43, illus.

Renner, M. (1987) Eighteenth-Century Merchant Ship Interiors.

Texas A&M University, p. 47, illus.

Stevenson, R. (1883) Treasure Island. London: Cassel & Co, p. 147, illus.

Unknown. (1725) Hanging of Major Stede Bonnet [Engraving].

Available at: https://jcb.lunaimaging.com/luna/servlet/detail/ JCB~1~1~1842~2850002:Majoor-Stede-Bonnet-Gehangen(Accessed: 15 January 2018).

Unknown. (1748) Massacre of Captain Skinner [Drawing].

Available at: https://archive.archaeology.org/online/reviews/ pirates/poll.html (Accessed: 15 January 2018).

Unknown. (1780) Press Gang Caricature [Drawing]. Available at: http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/britishnavy-impressment/ (Accessed: 10 January 2018).

Velde, W. (1680) The Cannon Shot [Oil Painting]. Available at: http://www.essentialvermeer.com/dutch-painters/velde.html#.

WmOkfqhl9PY (Accessed: 20 January 2018).

38 I MAG E SOURCES

Trieux, J. (1723) Eighteenth-Century Round Robin [Document].

Available at: http://thepirateempire.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/ (Accessed: 5 January 2018).

(Velde, 1680) The Cannon Shot