Swashbuckler 1700

Recently I was amazed about that how many of the early books of 17th and 18th centuries can be found on wed. Being a lucky one I found this as and e-book without even searching it more than a few minutes : A voyage round the world, by the way of the great South Sea performed in a private expedition during the war, which broke out with Spain, in the year 1718 2nd ed., rev. and republ. / by George Shelvocke, Esq. by Capt. George Shelvocke. Published 1757 http://www.archive.org/stream/avoyageroundwor00schegoog#page/n157/mode/2up/search/cap Too bad so some pages are missing in this e-book including pages that covers the period of may and early June of 1719 and so the yellow pirate flag part I was originally looking for is not in this e- book version This is not really piratical or even nautical but of the period and Americas But there is an interesting description apparently about Spanish American Indian clothing. Anyway it almost fits to that we know about hunter buccaneers of the earlier time. Also did British postilions use montero cap style hats? Well apparently yes... Picture of the page here http://ia600308.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/28/items/avoyageroundwor00schegoog/avoyageroundwor00schegoog_tif.zip&file=avoyageroundwor00schegoog_tif/avoyageroundwor00schegoog_0158.tif&scale=4&rotate=0 And picture than came just before and it is apparently linked to that description http://ia700308.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/28/items/avoyageroundwor00schegoog/avoyageroundwor00schegoog_tif.zip&file=avoyageroundwor00schegoog_tif/avoyageroundwor00schegoog_0156.tif&scale=2&rotate=0

Yep they are identical with the details... BTW note the ship's flag of the 1742 Blackbeard picture and compare it with 1736 one and you will notice that in the later reprint there seems to be just a enormous skull on the bowsprit while in the early work there is actually a flag. That looks silly...

Yep but in fact they are "different" pictures just really really similar but the artist is different. Those on the site you refer are from 1736 book and those I refer to are 1742 book See the original 1736 print and the 1724 reprint http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Edward_Teach_Commonly_Call%27d_Black_Beard_%28bw%29.jpg http://ia700308.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?zip=/8/items/generaltruehisto00defo/generaltruehisto00defo_jp2.zip&file=generaltruehisto00defo_jp2/generaltruehisto00defo_0184.jp2&scale=1.3651642475171888&rotate=0 One interesting thing (well I consider is as interesting) is that the latter one, which was clearly engraved using that old print as a model, ended up to be a mirror image. So the latter artist did not twist the image when he was copying it. So the latter is a mirrors image since the print is always other way around in the paper than the engraving in the copper plate. This man was the engraver of the 1742 pictures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Cole_(the instrument maker) as well as the artist behind the original 1724 Ghop pictures (like this http://digital.lib.ecu.edu/encore/ncgre000/00000001/00000857/00000857_ac_0001.jpg)

http://openlibrary.org/books/OL22880932M/A_general_and_true_history_of_the_lives_and_actions_of_the_most_famous_highwaymen_murderers_street-r General history of pyrates, highwaymen, murders, &c. by Charles Johnson 1742. So a quite early work and it is apparently a later edition of 1736 book with just a little edited illustrations. there is some quite early illustrations but only few of pirates... What I find interesting is that the illustrator is Benjamin Cole the same man who made the early 1724 pictures in GHop. But in 1725 and 1730s editions of Johnson's works there is pictures of different maker than Cole. Also a Dutch 1700 edition of Buccaneers of America is nice http://www.archive.org/stream/historiederboeca00exqu#page/n5/mode/2up

I saw no actual answers to that "sail ho" question so: Well it is from this site http://pirates.hegewisch.net/nautical_lexicon.html#s but it is better than nothing "According to Adm. Smythe, this was a phrase used to signal a ship of unknown origin or intentions. It dates from 1840. Other sources say that the phrase "Sail! Sail!" was used to by ships during the Golden Age." Interesting that it might be that new... Also interesting that the term "(land) lubber" dates back at least as early as 1740s and can, and probably is, years older than that. Interesting. I always thought is as a Hollywood cliche. I think the difference of "Ahoy" and "Hoa hoa!" is rather small. But still it is "sad" that the newer sailing terms are almost always messed with pirates of 1600-1700s...

Quote from The history of the pyrates: containing the lives of Captain Mission. Captain Bowen. Captain Kidd ... and their several crews 1728 (http://digital.lib.ecu.edu/17002) Nothing really special but nice quotes about many things like provisions and pirate and ladies.... "In the mean Time Vane made towards the Coast of Hispaniola, living riotously on Board, having store of Liquor, and plenty of fresh Provisions, such as Hogs, Goats, Sheep, Fowl, which he got upon easy Terms, for touching at a Place called Isleatherer, he plundered the Inhabitants of as much of their Provision as they could carry away: Here they cruised to about February, when, near the Windward Passage of Cape Mase, they met with a large rich Ship of London, called the Kingston, loaden with Bale Goods, and other rich Merchandize, and having several Passengers on Board, some English, and some Jews, besides two Women. Towards the North-End of Jamaica they also met with a Turtle Sloop, bound in for that Island, on Board of which (after having first plundered her) they put the Captain of the Kingston, and some of his Men, and all the Passengers, except the two Women, whom they kept for their own Entertainment, contrary to the usual Practice of pyrates, who generally sent them away, least they should occasion Contention. The Ship Kingston they kept for their own Use; for now their Company being strengthened by a great many Recruits, some Voluntiers, and some forced Men out of the Neptune and Kingston, they thought they had Hands enough for two Ships; accordingly they shifted several of their Hands on Board the Kingston, and John Rackham, alias Callico Jack, (so called, because his Jackets and Drawers were always made of Callico) Quarter-Master to Vane, was unanimously chosen Captain of the Kingston."

Now looking this tread again I feel ashamed by my earlier behavior. But now I have something to say actually. To correct what I said about that hanging picture: It is pirate execution near Edinburgh in 1721 were pirates including John Steward were hanged.* And actually thinking about read coats and pirates: think a Rn sailor wearing a red waistcoat with sleeves, red breeches and a leather cap with white tread . With a musket his appearance would be pretty much same as the look of some English 18th century light infantrymen. Just a play with ideas nothing more. * actually I bought That book and I am completely sure what the pictures are. while now I have read the whole book and I really appreciate the work that the authors have done by bringing us the first (quite) accurate pirate book I am not taking back the criticism about that book. The pirates in than book are so "copy paste" pirates wearing really uniformed clothing and weaponry with only a few different variations (like there is only red and tan Monmouth caps and only one style of tan PTG hats and all of the petticoat-breeches are checked, only one style of sailor knife appears in pictures.(the book, after all, claims that this pirates were really like) I think there might have been a more versatile vision of pirates with a little more variability and it could have helped (at least me) to make a vision of pirates as a group individual men and not just a copy paste bulk. We know that more variability was among sailors and pirates (in their appearance) that the author wants to think, or at least I firmly believe so but again this is just my humble opinion)

Actually Snelgrave mentions pistols and Cutlasses as well as muskets and half-pikes. Now I am thinking the weaponry of traders and slavers alike. The mention of a couch makes me wonder the casual decor of captain's cabins of the time..... but that does not belong in this topic... "-- Men Negroes take hold of the chief Mate, in order to throw him over board, he laid on them so heartily with the flat fide of his Cutlace, that they soon quitted the Mate, who escaped from them, and run on the Quarter Deck to get Arms. I was then sick with an Ague, and lying on a Couch in the great Cabbin, the Fit being just come on. However, I no sooner heard the Outcry, That the Slaves were mutinying, but I took two Pistols, and run on the Deck with them; where meeting with my Father and the chief Mate, I delivered a Pistol to each of them -- My Father seeing this stout Man in so much Danger, ventured amongst the Negroes, to save him; and fired his Pistol over their Heads, thinking to frighten them...." Too bad that not the whole book is online... anyway that was from the same book than the earlier quote..... Now a decline what it comes to reliability of sources. In a ( little inaccurate) documentary that was actually in special feature dvd of the first potc David Cordingly said "usually only the captain and the quarter master had a pistol but not all individual pirates" I think this might refer to the buccaneer era when small fire-arms were rarer than in Gaop. There is many records of pirates not only captains or officer having many pistols E.G four or even more. Also in the Whydah finds there is parts for more than just two or three pistols or I am I wrong? Of course not all individual pirate would be carrying a pistol or two and there were crew like Worley's that were likely so poorly equipped that they had no pistols at all. Snellgrave told that he owned at least a pair of pistols and if a merchant captain owns a pair think how many pistols there would be when pirates rob lets say dozen merchants. Of course Snelgrave owned a rather large ship and was likely a wealthier man than the average slaver captain. Also the pistol is commonly referred in pirate articles like in Robert's where it was said that men must keep their pistols, and cutlass clean and fit for service. This gives a impression that pistols were rather common in his crew.

Those are neat pictures There is even fishermen.. interesting indeed

Well Foxe's Gallery says so http://www.picturetr...um/view/6655055 . though, as we have seen, there is some errors in that gallery (no offence to the maker). Well the man with the coat is dressed much similarly than the Dutch mariners generally dressed (see the first page of this tread). Actually I personally see his hat to be a Brimmed Monmouth cap (PTG) commonly worn by the Dutch sailors. The other sailor figure is rather clearly a ship boy with a cap and bare feet. Also maritime themes of variety of sort were common in Dutch painting of the era so there were many maritime person featured in art as well. Holland was very clearly a maritime power those days, thought a fading one, and there were really many mariners the Netherlands. Also the painter was from Rotterdam which was one of the biggest sea port in Holland with some VOC operation there as well. Well the other painting is pretty much different. Unlike the earlier painting the 1709 painting was an allegorical description of class differences (said in a history book that I have not handy. Unfortunately there weren't said who the figures were...). But still the question remains: who are those figures?....

The "blowing the brains" out was apparently a rather common threat From Johnson's book (how I love these digital collection http://digital.lib.ecu.edu/17001) " IT was proved against this Prisoner, by Captain Trahern and George Fenn, that he was one of those Voluntiers who was at the Attack and Robbery of the Company's Ship, called the King Solomon: That he bully'd well among them who dar'd not make any Reply, but was very easy with his Friends, who knew him; for Moody, on this Occasion, took a large Glass from him, and threatned to blow his Brains out, (a favourite Phrase with these Pyrates) if he muttered at it"

Source: Pirates and Buccaneers of the Atlantic Coast by Edward Rowe Snow here some nice stuff Governor Benjamin Fletcher of New York wrote about Thomas Tew who was asking for privateering commission in 1694: “I wished in my mind to make him a sober man, and in particular to cure him of a vile habit of swearing” William Atkinson, was detained by mutinous William Fly (or Fry) in 1726 , because of his superior navigational skills. Here is Fly’s message to the forced pilot “Look ye, Captain Atkinson, it not that we care for your company, God damn ye, God damn my soul, if you don’t act like an honest man, god damn ye, and offer to play any rogue’s tricks, by God damn ye, and God sink me, but I will blow your brains out; God damn me if I don’t. Now Captain Atkinson, you may pilot us wrong, which god damn ye, would be a rascally trick, by God, because you would betray men who trust in you; but, by the eternal Jesus you shan't live to us hang’d…. If you will be a villain and betray your trust, may God strike me dead, and may I drink a bowl of brimstone and fire with the devil, if i don’t send you head-long to hell, God dam me…”

I see. good points indeed. Not to defend the bad habit of using too late evidence but merely just to show that there was no really big change that occurred in 1740s and 1750. And of course with pictures Still I must say it seems that the war you mentioned had clearly not much effect to sailor's fashion. Here we have a mid 1730s sailor and a later sailor from 1750s. Well the jacket is different but that is pretty much the all.... Not to say that we can unreasonably stretch the periods as we like but to tell that we can see that changes happened little by little... And to correct myself there is indeed a one English made picture of English sailor from the period 1705-1735 and it is this. But even this has no certain date but it is likely from 1718 and again we can found a counterpart for him from a later print (see the man with the small whip on the left) http://industryandid...crop_grey.jpg

And Pritt.Privateer this is perhaps the one tread where it is said that this is a later picture. See my post in the page 2 that I quoted. Of course some others migth have said that in one other tread. And looking my old posts here I apology for multiposting, bad grammar as well as some oddly written comments and some lack of discretion in my comments. That last section is ofcourse just my humble opinion and some people historians in any rate (like the another writer of the book "Pirate: The Golden Age" ,A historian who I have critisised with too hard tone here), like to go with the really specifically time correct evidence even if it is really sparse (and thus ignore evidence (of thing like clothing or habits) just because it is few years later than the goal period). I would prefer to also take look at just a bit later evidence if it is much greater (and if it is know that not much has changed between the evidence and the period) (I think one decade later or so) to get a better picture of that earlier era as well. Meaning here that my humble opinion is that for example when reconstructing pirate appearance of the era E.G 1700-1730 it is good to look evidence of 1730s or even 1740s with the specific period evidence just to get a better picture if the evidence of the goal period 1700-1730 is sparse. But as for using circa 1770 picture to reconstruct the early decades 1700s I see the evidence far too late to be a good source. This ofcourse was just my humble opinion.

Well still it is odd that even that many misjudgments happened. I would think mariners could know even better but of course even they don't have super eyesight.... And I think Roberts thought at first that Swallow was a French merchant until the crewman came... But was there some fraud with flags or something made by Ogle. I am not sure...

I've been doing quite a bit of research into maritime clothing during the 1680-1740 as of lately, and I have been searching for the origins of this picture. I have looked through all the various editions of Rodger's Cruising Voyage Round the World up to 1740 and have not found this image in any of them. I've even engaged a couple other people in helping me finding the origins of this picture, but to no avail. I think there is a thread somewhere around here or at the Brethren's forum that states that this image comes from the 1760s. I wish I could find that thread, but anyway, I would more than likely agree with them. As far as I can tell, this image is not period. While it portrays an event in the 1710s, the illustration came from some decade well beyond it. I post this now because I see so many people still post this as evidence for period attire. I wouldn't use this one, since from what I can find, it is no where a period representation of the event. I have found that quite a few publications mistakenly date illustrations to the event or person that is depicted (and not from when it was made). This is especially true in those late 19th and early 20th century publications that helped quite a few people set foundations for martime history and maritime clothing. Moral of the story: Be carefull what you use for evidence. Have the artist, year it was made, and the book it came in if it was part of a book. Well thin migth help http://jcb.lunaimagi...2~2&mi=4&trs=28 lol in Wiki there is the right date http://en.wikipedia....i/File:Guay.jpg Hmmmm so what I believe is wrong here (dismissing my earlier posts in this tread) ... Unlike this image suggests the tricornes were not so universal in gaop than they were in later 18th century when this pic was made. Same with the long trousers they were less popular... Thought many sailor in Gaop used them especially those with Rogers (so that is not technically inaccurate) and even the style of shoes was different than in this later picture. However for anyone who like to know stuff of the early 1700s the lack of pictures of seaman and pirates is dire For example can anyone point out any English picture of English sailors (if not counted General history) dating lets say 1705-1735? I, while not a real researcher,(I dare to claim) know a large percent of the period pictures that can be found online (it is actually interesting that how much of the museum images etc. have been converted in computer form.)

Well if the hull including gun ports is damaged. New hinges that were used for hatches in cannon ports would be needed. http://pic20.picture...2/391122382.jpg But I am not sure is that too complicated for the blacksmith. Well also in my mind comes, albeit not complicated, typical nails that were used for ships....

Van Vorst was said to a Dutchman and his name tells that he was from Dutch family. I think there was many Dutch families in New York since I dare to claim that many families didn't move in 1664 just because the owner of the colony was changed (it was changed without a fight so there were no massacres of Dutch citizens done or anything like that). I think he might have good English skills thought because of his birth place. But in any case while the English speaking men formed the overwhelming majority in the pirate crews the number of Dutch, Germans, Spanish, Swedes and especially French should be noted, while only few per-sets, we can still say that Gaop pirate crews were multinational in that scale and limits that were possible (pirate did not met many china-men etc. while raiding European shipping).

That is Interesting. Yeah Van Vorst sounds like a Dutch or perhaps German or French. However while Dutch and Germans might be messed up by others these two pirates were clearly from Holland....

Said in Pirates and Buccaneers of the Atlantic Coast by Edward Rowe Snow. When there is written about Bellamy's pirates hanged in Boston in 1717 (thank to Mission for the hint) "The (six) pirates were Simon Van Vorst, of New York; John Brown of Jamaica; Thomas Baker of Holland; Hendrick Quintor of Amsterdam; Peter Hoof of Sweden, and John Sheean of Nantes." So lets look two English colonists, two Dutch*, a Swede and one Frenchman. Bellamy's crew was probably one of the most multinational crews at the time but this is still illustrative to a extent. *I wonder that surprisingly many dutch appear in many places (not just this)

I keep that book in mind. ((edit) My good goolging skills allowed me the find an online version of that book. I was not aware of that fact that you meant so old book (1940s) but anyway thanks the book is really nice.) So the answer is that the Anglo-American maritime circles were small in gaop and people like merchants were really well aware of pirates and constantly kept a weather eye for them just in case there was something that seemed more or less fishy. I think if a vessel seemed oddly well armed or overmanned it was a likely to be a pirate craft. Also thinking again there is some cases when pirates were not identified easily (nor because of their ships or faces). For example Howel Davis cheated Portuguese governor by presenting a privateer. Of course any vessel could be identified by its flag but that was not what i meant. But anyway good points you have there. Still I wonder how pirates made so many misjudgments what it came to other ships at sea. Really often they messed up with that what is a warship and what is not. But the distance was probably an explanation here or the bad eyesight ( ) as well as the fact that many vessels looked quite much the same.

I think the answer could be yes. Otherwise the pardon of King George would not have been so appealing to the pyrates of the Flying Gang. Well that tells something.I knew that pirates pretty much knew each other but I was not aware of the others like former privateers or buccaneers. Or I was aware but I didn't thought about them. Well I guess that the Anglo-American maritime circles were not too big back then so the world was really small. Also other interesting things are that pirates and how they identified or did not identify other ships at sea. HMS Swallow was recognized by its former crewman aboard Robert's pirate ship. While he might know his former ship really well this is funny. And Often pirates had problems of recognizing ships or even the type of the ship from a distance. E.G this happened when Edward Low mistook the HMS Greyhound to be a merchantman.... Could it simply be that Low had no proper spyglass?

There are really many records of pirates and pirate ships recognized by navy or merchant captains. This happened for example to Vane who was rescued after shipwreck in 1719 in Honduras and then the merchant captain who rescued him recognized him and turned him over to authorities in Jamaica. Or another example George Lowther was careening his vessel in 1723 on an island near Venezuela when Walter Moore, a merchant captain of the South sea company, recognized them as pirates and attacked. Was the world really so small back than that pirates could be recognize so easily. We know that pirates and their vessels didn't differ much from other sailors or ships so how could they tell that “he is Charles Vane” like that. We know that pirates had no skull hats to mark them or anything like that and we know that pirates ships didn't fly jolly Rogers 24/7 so there was really hard to tell who is a pirate and who is not same with the ships Still many pirates were recognized. In an era when there was no wanted posters with photos with faces or anything this seems really odd to me.