Brit.Privateer

I've seen those images before. Even went digging a couple times to find the book they originally came from. Book was too rare to obtain here in the U.S., even through interlibrary loan. It unfortunately meant I couldn't use it for my research. The condition of studies in maritime clothing for English mariners is in bad enough condition (a reason I worked on it). As far as I can tell, even with the language barrier, the study of French maritime clothing is in a worse state. Someday, maybe, someone else will do graduate work on the subject and dig up period sources and provide notes.

Where did you read about that? While French maritime outfits are not the main focus of my maritime clothing work, I tried my best to compare what little is available about the French to the English in regards to Maritime Clothing. It's too bad that there is so little translated into English.

Fox's response covers a lot of ground, but I want to point out one thing that a lot of people miss, the difference between a letter of marque and a commission for a private man of war. Most of the time, when people think of privateers, they think of those holding a commission as a private man of war. These commissions specified a ship could sail on a cruise with the specific intent of seeking out enemy commerce vessels of specific enemies of the nation in a specific geographic area at sea during a specific period of time. These ships were intentionally manned and equipped to go hunt down enemy merchant ships. Meanwhile, a letter of marque only allowed a vessel to attack enemies of the nation at sea if the happened to encounter in the course of a voyage involving other business. In most cases, it was a merchant on a commercial enterprise getting a letter of marque so they had the ability to legally attack an enemy vessel and legally claim her as a prize. If the letter of marque vessel happened to think they had the ability and manpower to do this, the letter allowed it, but the weren't allowed to go cruising for enemy prizes (it's just a case of if they encounter an enemy during the voyage). This all comes from the article "The Origins and Regulations of Eighteenth-Century British Privateering" by David J. Starkey in Bandits at Sea: A Pirates Reader.

Not really, there are way too many post-and-beam buildings depicted, too few small hovel-like dwellings, and the town in general is too built up. This is not surprising since the game needs to have a built up Nassau so the main character can do the various amazing jumps and climbing over roofs that the Assassin's Creed franchise is known for. Check out the 4th-7th paragraphs in my article in the "Shelter, Trade, Food, and Rum: Living in Nassau" section.

Thank you Swashbuckler and Mission for posting links to my stuff on here. Also, Mission's reply above is on point, very on point. Now for the original questions: "I need info a maps of Nassau during the republic of Pirate phase, which is from 1715 to 1718." As others pointed out, you won't find a map of Nassau from 1715-1718. There are maps from a number of years afterwards when authority is restored. Besides, there isn't much to map since, besides the shape of the harbor and the fort, there weren't really much of a road/street network to speak of warranting a map. See the "Strongest Man Carries the Day" article: https://csphistorical.com/2015/07/26/the-strongest-man-carries-the-day-life-in-new-providence-1716-1717/ . I should also make a point about the use of the term "Republic of Pirates". The term wasn't invented until Colin Woodard wrote his book of the same time a decade ago. As for the word, "Republic" itself, I get the impression people are assuming a lot about Nassau in the 1710s because of that term, since they associate "Republic" with, "A state in which power rests with the people or their representatives; spec. a state without a monarchy. Also: a government, or system of government, of such a state; a period of government of this type." (OED) or even, "Any community of people...esp. one considered to have equality between its members." (OED) The evidence from that times suggests no government during the time the pirates were in control. As the title of my article goes, things went by whoever had strength behind them. No elections, no rules, no enforced standard of equality, no official leaders of anything beyond individual pirate crews. (Again, see my article). I've had to address this issue before over on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4kwfcw/who_were_the_founders_of_the_republic_of_pirates/ If anything, the only way "Republic" is appropriate is if it's taken in the figurative sense of just meaning a community of some kind. "Are AC IV video game and Black Sails a historical view on the famous pirates of that age?" Again, Mission summed it up pretty well. Both of them are entertainment first and foremost. Historically accuracy is by far secondary. The second paragraph of my article on Nassau sums up pretty well in regards to their portrayals of Nassau, "The romanticized image of the typical pirate base set at a remote Caribbean settlement features a group of wooden post-and-beam frame buildings, built near an elegant beach, and populated with pirates gallivanting with attractive women day and night. This common media depiction, while appealing to general audiences, is two-dimensional. This weak caricature does not delve deep into understanding what New Providence was like in 1716-1717, when Nassau’s pirate population was at its peak." Assassins Creed 4: Black Flag is interesting for its attempt to incorporate a lot of historical figures and events, but it still has the entertainment value and has plenty of accuracy issues with said figures and events - and especially with material culture. Black Sails has even less accuracy in regards to historical figures and events. I cover the accuracy of that show in much more detail in my editorial: https://csphistorical.com/2016/02/07/editorial-black-sails-historical-accuracy-and-the-pirate-genre-in-hollywood/ Neither Assassins Creed or Black Sails are that accurate. They have pieces of history in there, but the story they try to tell with it overrides any attempt at getting an accurate and balanced portrayal of the past. Think the film "Patriot" for an idea of what kind of accuracy we are talking about (though Patriot probably did a little better in comparison).

My New Article: Anne Bonny and Mary Read: Female Pirates and Maritime Women https://csphistorical.com/2016/05/08/anne-bonny-and-mary-read-female-pirates-and-maritime-women-page-one/ This will be the kind of article you'll come back to several times. It is packed with information on the two female pirates. It presents their history as presented in the historical record and then discusses the fictional aspects of their mythos, including how a 1960s fiction work accidentally led to the creation of the "facts" surrounding Anne's birth. But for those of you who are also interested in context, there are sections about other women who interacted with pirates, including the only other female pirate of the 1680-1740 period. There is also a section on maritime women that outlines many ways women interacted with sailors. For those of you who ask, "what did women do in the Golden Age of Piracy?" You will have a great starting point of reference in that section. Enjoy, and happy Mothers Day.

Anytime I see "letters of marque" mentioned online... There is an article in that Pirate Reader, a book featuring a lot of articles relating to piracy. One article covers privateering and explains the difference between a letter of marque and commissions for a private man-of-war. There was still a difference between the two at the time, and while I haven't looked for the actual original documents specifically issued in the mid seventeenth century to Morgan and others, based on what is in the previously mentioned article, they would be issued commissions as private men-of-war since the letters of marque would be given to vessels whose main purpose was something other than commerce raiding. The letters of marque basically gave permission to vessels conducting other business the right to attack and bring in prizes of enemy vessels they might encounter while sailing to conduct their other business. That is different from the commissions that set down a ship would purposely go out seeking prizes from specific countries, in a specific place, during a specific period. Sorry, its just a peeve of mine.

I decided to make a Black Sails editorial for my website to replace my old review I wrote a couple of years ago. I condensed my critique of the accuracy and created a whole new section explaining the significance of Black Sails in the realm of the pirate genre in Hollywood and why it took so long to get a show like Black Sails. http://csphistorical.com/2016/02/07/editorial-black-sails-historical-accuracy-and-the-pirate-genre-in-hollywood/

I've written another article for my site, this time on period correct food for Anglo-American sailors and pirates from 1680-1740. This is only the first part, there will be a second since the subject is way too big for one article. Hope you all enjoy: http://csphistorical.com/2016/01/24/salt-pork-ships-biscuit-and-burgoo-sea-provisions-for-common-sailors-and-pirates-part-1/

I’ve written another article for my site, CSP Historical, this time about Blackbeard. It’s called “The Firsts of Blackbeard: Exploring Edward Thatch’s Early Days as a Pirate.” By examining Thatch’s early career up to about November of 1717, through the lens of when particular firsts occurred, I help clear away the myths and clutter surrounding Thatch’s early history. In the process, I also end up examining some of Hornigold’s history and the seldom-mentioned Captain Napping. I suspect there’s a little bit of something for everyone in this article. In my previous article review, I mentioned delaying an article because I wanted to obtain some documents. This is that article: http://csphistorical.com/2015/10/18/the-firsts-of-blackbeard-exploring-edward-thatchs-early-days-as-a-pirate/

Determining the way the buildings of Nassau were constructed isn't that easy - as you can tell by the endnotes on the article. In trying to piece together the evidence, I presented what I found. If you want to find out more, you'll have to look at the sources I put in the endnotes and explored from there. Learning about seventeenth and eighteenth-century building construction is a large task. But, if you just want something to get your feet wet and to get you familiar with some basics on period building techniques, a good intro guide is Home Building and woodworking in Colonial America by C. Keith Wilbur. After that book, future reading on period architecture doesn't seem so scary anymore.

I've written a new post for my blog about what life was like in New Providence. It's called "The Strongest Man Carries the Day," Life in New Providence, 1716-1717. http://csphistorical.com/2015/07/26/the-strongest-man-carries-the-day-life-in-new-providence-1716-1717/ Find out all kinds of interesting information about life in this pirate stronghold during it's peak years. Learn about the geography of the port, where the pirates came from, what structures they lived in, what women did in the settlement, and more. The beginning of the article includes a convenient click-to-jump-to table of contents.

I wrote on my blog about sailors' possessions during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. I cast the post around analyzing one of the most stereotypical depictions of a sea chest, Billy Bone's from Treasure Island. Figured that would draw the attention of people who are more interested in the pirate aspect of that period's history. http://csphistorical.com/2015/07/07/a-sailors-possessions/

Don't forget to follow this blog if you're interested in getting more insight into history relevant to pirates. Here are three posts I plan to do next: Reflection on the Tuscarora Conflict Inside the Sailor's Pockets, Nassau - Its Appearance in 1717 Don't miss on immediate email notifications of when these posts go live. You can find links to follow my blog at the bottom of any post on the blog (including the Recommended Books post).

I've started a new blog, "Colonies, Ships, and Pirates." For the first post, I decided to put together one of the most frequent questions I get online, what books do you recommend? http://csphistorical.com/2015/06/28/recommend-books-on-pirate-history/

He has a book out, in it's fourth edition, take a look at Duffus's website for getting the most recent edition that came out last year (rather than a earlier edition). http://lookingglassproductions.org/LookingGlass2008/Books.html Its interesting that two posters I know who are not Americans comment on this first. There are a number of Americans who, since they've written on Blackbeard before and neglected academic standards like Duffus mentioned, don't like Duffus's work because it goes against the story line people are comfortable with.

This is astounding. This is Kevin Duffus giving a presentation on March 19 to the Virginia Historical Society, "What's Wrong with Black Beard?" I saw a version of this talk about two years ago in Washington, North Carolina. This version is even better. Even if you disagree with some of his points, the evidence he has found relating to Blackbeard's history I think demonstrates how highly worth discussion and debate his position is. The sheer amount of evidence here has to make you at least think "there are too many coincidences for at least some of it to not be correct. Surely all these names matching all can't just be coincidence (at least some of the "coincidences" must not be coincidences by sheer odds of how many coincidences there are)."

probably some mass grave or a lone unmarked grave where they buried all the other criminals.

That assumes that Pirates of the Caribbean was actually trying to be accurate and recreate the actual past - instead of an alternative universe that is loosely inspired by our world's past and heavily mixes in fantasy. Considering that the King of Britain in Pirates 4 is George the 2nd, that the Pirate Codex was founded by Bartholomew Roberts and Henry Morgan (two men that weren't even alive at the same time historically), the vast mixing of material culture, and so on - I really don't take examining the issues of historical accuracy in Pirates of the Caribbean franchise seriously. It would be more viable to try to critique Hallmark's Blackbeard movie for historical accuracy.

The one map you don't have a date for is from around the mid eighteenth century (c.1750), based on clues in the map - including the names on plantations (some of the tracts belong to later Governors) and buildings in Nassau (the chapel for instance wasn't built until after the pirate presence).

I suspect you'll benefit most from this book (which is now available in paperback), Women and English Piracy 1540-1720, which gives some pretty fair and strong academic coverage to Bonny and Read towards the end of the book.

I should point out that, if someone did have the skeletal remains of John Rackham, the knowledge of their existence would be talked about a lot more. Unless someone is keeping it secret, they have not preserved and discovered the remains of John Rackham. Even if they found a mass grave of where they dumped remains of executed people in Jamaica, how would you separate out which one was Rackham? The odds and circumstances for Rackham's remains to still be floating around intact are pretty much none.

I've never encountered the James Bonny being a black man, at least not that I can remember. If was black, the Bahamas was and wasn't a terrible place to be for him. If he so wished, he could try to settle down in the Bahamas like some of the other free blacks on the island - places such as Bermuda liked to dump their trouble makers and free blacks on the Bahamas. But, on the other hand, slavery still existed in the Bahamas, plus Spanish and French raids into the Bahamas could mean re-enslavement or death if caught.

You're saying that Disney got a hold of a roughly 300-year old skeleton that was John Rackham and used it as set dressing in film? Or are you saying the film makers were saying in their heads that that skeleton they made for that shoot was supposed to represent John Rackham?

Their pirate career went from 22 August 1720 to 20 October 1720, only 59 days. Their trial (the day specific to them) took place on November 19 1720, only 30 days after their capture.