tattoos

[Iron Jon]

And your period source for this is?

Not even close to being period. These are mostly 20th century "traditional" nautical tattoos.

[Jib]

as i had referenced earlier on this thread the travelers bound for jeruesalem were tattooed by the muslims as sign of passage that they had paid for the priviledge of entering the holy city after the crusades.

Callenish I seem to recall reading something like this too! I also seem to recall that Coptic Christians often tattooed a cross upon them so they wouldn't be accused of being followers of Islam.

I also seem to remember something about the Turkish Janissary as having various and assorted tattoos (wheels, passages from the Koran, etc) upon them.

[MadL]

Callenish I seem to recall reading something like this too! I also seem to recall that Coptic Christians often tattooed a cross upon them so they wouldn't be accused of being followers of Islam.

I also seem to remember something about the Turkish Janissary as having various and assorted tattoos (wheels, passages from the Koran, etc) upon them.

Tattoos have been found in various human races since virtually th' dawn o' time, I believe Poopdeck Pappy was quoting various Navel descriptions from a recently ran National Geographic show for each one o' them were discussed (even interviewed one fellow who 'collects' them) and yes they are modern t' semi-modern, they did not exactly give dates to their origins and even at one point said there is no record o' when the first one was stamped.

However I think th' "period" request was for that o' th' GAoP, for that so far no one, naught even National Geo, has been able t' offer up. I think it may have been Mission who read one passage somewhere but there appeared t' even be questions about it...I think that was earlier in this very thread (too lazy t' look back, still recovering from bad cold).

Now National Geo did have one chap they believe was from VERY early man who had ink marks upon he's body, it'was indeed a very interesting show, even covered modern day gang markings.

[Mission]

However I think th' "period" request was for that o' th' GAoP, for that so far no one, naught even National Geo, has been able t' offer up. I think it may have been Mission who read one passage somewhere but there appeared t' even be questions about it...I think that was earlier in this very thread (too lazy t' look back, still recovering from bad cold).

Yeah, it was a comment on those tats not being GAoP - that's mostly what we discuss in Twill. I believe there is a modern Tattoo thread in the Crow's Nest forum and probably another in the Pyrate's Heart forum.

I did cite a couple period accounts previously in this very thread. The exercise is finding them is left to the reader.

However, my understanding from my reading and talking with those researching GAoP is that while tattoos certainly existed during this time and while there are a few (3, I believe) accounts of sailors having them, they were not a common element of the European sailor. The tattoo-GAoP pirate connection is most likely a modern idea, propagated by movies. Even the "rebel" association with tattoos is modern. In the distant past they seem to have been regarded as curios. People paid money to see those who had them. (I am thinking here of the story of the tattooed prince that Dampier brought back to England to display in a sort of sideshow fashion. Actually, as I understand it, he would bring the prince to people's houses who would then pay for the privilege of seeing his tattoos.)

[CrazyCholeBlack]

Darn it if you guys only went a few years further into the future! Ran across these while searching for something completely different (naturally ). They're all just past the GAoP unfortunately but worthy of note for those interested in the subject of historical tattooing.

ON Saturday last {1739} was committed to James City County Goal, a Man of middle Age...he is mark'd with Gunpowder on both his Hands with 4 Dots, and a Cross in the Middle

RAN away from Capt. McCarty's Plantation, on Pope's Creek, in Westmoreland County...a Servant Man belonging to me the Subscriber...is suppos'd to have the Figure of our Saviour mark'd with Gunpowder on one of his Arms. He went away about the 20th of April last {1738}

Richard Kibble, is a middle siz'd young Fellow, has several Marks made with Gunpowder on his Arms, but particularly one on his Breast, being the Figures of a Woman and a Cherry-Tree

RAN away, the 8th of July last {1739}, from the Subscribers, living in Westmoreland County...an Irishman, of a middle Stature...He has on one of his Arms a Bleeding Heart, prick'd with Gunpowder, and a Name at Length, with several other Letters.

Virginia Runaways “Runaway Slave Advertisements

from 18th-century Virginia newspapers”. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/subjects/runaways/search.html (accessed March 8, 2009).

I've found more but they continue even further from the period in question. As an interesting side note, most of these references came up while searching for "committed to gaol" advertisements. Curious connection indeed

Chole

[Mission]

Darn it if you guys only went a few years further into the future! Ran across these while searching for something completely different (naturally ). They're all just past the GAoP unfortunately but worthy of note for those interested in the subject of historical tattooing.

<snip>

Virginia Runaways “Runaway Slave Advertisements

from 18th-century Virginia newspapers”. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/subjects/runaways/search.html (accessed March 8, 2009).

I've found more but they continue even further from the period in question. As an interesting side note, most of these references came up while searching for "committed to gaol" advertisements. Curious connection indeed

Chole

Actually, this makes good sense. These folks all appear to be slaves. Those few records of period European sailors we have indicate that they had sort of "gone native" by copying the style of the Africans or indigenous Central and South American Indians. This does not suggest that it would have been acceptable among those of European descent - the real question for most GAoP piracy purists. It just verifies that people from places we already know to have practiced tattooing may have done so even when they got to the "new world." (Or they may just have had them already.)

[CrazyCholeBlack]

Actually, this makes good sense. These folks all appear to be slaves. Those few records of period European sailors we have indicate that they had sort of "gone native" by copying the style of the Africans or indigenous Central and South American Indians. This does not suggest that it would have been acceptable among those of European descent - the real question for most GAoP piracy purists. It just verifies that people from places we already know to have practiced tattooing may have done so even when they got to the "new world." (Or they may just have had them already.)

Actually Mission, not one is listed as a "slave" and not one of the men mentioned is African. These are all white, European males in the colony of Virginia. Although I realize I didn't include their racial identity, which is included in the full advertisements. I left the quotes short & to the point regarding tattoos so as to not overwhelm the readers. The link is there for anyone to continue with their own research using the materials.

Chole

[MadL]

the real question for most GAoP piracy purists....

This be th' part where me own brain begin t' burn...since when does th' GAoP belong exclusive t' "European dog decent"?

Me own pirate figure, including me real life family tree, come from Germany & Ireland. As I understand many a sailor throughout th' period had Irish or Scottish blood as well as English dog blood; me own Mad L's family unit had set sail for th' New World only for th' poor way a German fisherman and Irish lass was treated in England where they met and tried t' make a life....

(long history, still working out details; father left Germany shortly before th' end o' th' Holly Roman Empire control; refusing t' convert t' Catholic or Protestant he just wanted t' live in peace. He met me mum, a sweet Irish tavern lass who had also left her homeland and found herself in England - still working out exact location - but being a Celt she was really nothing more then a slave. Twas after an English cure who framed me da for stealing a loaf o' bread, that was really stolen by he's own bloody son, that me father secured passage upon a trade ship t' avoid th' hangman's noose, along with me, a stout lad o' about 12, 'n me mum we set sail...then encountered Spanish pirates, taken prisoner, then around th' end o' 1600s th' English began t' attempt entering th' Spanish controlled Caribbean where th' ship we were imprisoned upon was captured; a couple o' our now English captors recognized me da 'n mum 'n was about t' hang'em from th' yardarm when he pleaded for me t' flee, over th' bow I went ne'er t' see either o' them again....for me that all began in 1661 when I was born t' a Germanic fisherman 'n an Irish lass, it now be 1709 'n I roam th' Caribbean 'n beyond offering me services t' any rouge pirate or buccaneer crew what fights what I have now learnt t'a be a cruel rule o' England, France, and Spain.)

...'n that pretty much covers th' heart o' th' GAoP and shows that NOT all pirates 'n rouges upon th' seven seas where o' English make. Also one may point out that some Celt clans throughout history had various body mark'ns as well.

Now, WHO among ye stand t' call me 'Heathen'?

[Stynky Tudor]

Darn it if you guys only went a few years further into the future! Ran across these while searching for something completely different (naturally ). They're all just past the GAoP unfortunately but worthy of note for those interested in the subject of historical tattooing.

Not that I want to stray off topic with a question that I know has been asked more times than I can count - but the answer always seems to change. Plus I'm trying to figure out why CrazyColeBlack feels the need to quantify her points as being outside the GAoP period.

So now what is the generally accepted time period for the GAoP?

Has the scope of the GAoP narrowed so much that pyrates after the 1730s aren't taken into account anymore?

Then there's the more obvious questions of how old were the individuals on record, and how old were their tattoos at the time the records were made. A given tattoo could have been 10, 20, 30 years old or more. . .

As for the point of slaves and indentured servants being tattooed - considering that many sailors were pressed into service and not serving freely, either by a navy or later by pyrates, that constitutes slavery to me.

Also I can only imagine that being stuck aboard ship, packed in tightly with a bunch of thugs, being bored with the routine day in and day out, would make for a semi-miserable living condition and quality of life. Confined, having access to a needle, a bit of charcoal and maybe gunpowder - doing a bit of decorative self-mutilation doesn't seem out of the realm of possibilities.

I understand that Twill is the go to place for information and talking documented facts. I really only have the one question and the rest is like most anthropological theory and is imaginative speculation at best.

[MadL]

For th' most part I understand th' "GAoP" spans from aprox 1650 through 1730; depending on whom ye be quoting, give or take 20 years.

As for tattoos, earrings, other personal articles; it would seem that historic records them self where quite sparse during th' period, probably due t' th' turmoil and abrupt changes in who controls what where and just how much (or little) they wanted th' mother land t' know they had found (or acquired) upon th' high seas and in ports abroad. Me suspicions be that there is much that will never be known or discovered no matter how deep we dig or how many times we dive for once th' "modern world" began setting outposts throughout th' Caribbean there was much deceit and deception among those who ruled and those who did not and those who wanted to. As far as records in England or Port Charles, they only know what they were told; as far as "pirates" in general, there appears t' be far too few accounts on record compared t' how many pirates there are believed to have been and I refuse t' believe th' few English pirates on record be th' only wolves upon th' sea at time, so with th' masses who were either killed and sunk at sea, or diapered and simply gobbled up with th' haze o' time, I would think that saying they all looked, acted, smelled, and tasted like any common Englishman o' th' time would only be a rather ego driven conclusion.

Well, that be me take on th' matter, then what could a heretic German/Irish American possibly know - I will return t' th' coal mines and me peasant sauerkraut stand now

[Fox]

Irrelevant point, Chole said "European" (and was correctly quoted as doing so), so whence all the fuss? Last time I looked in an atlas Germany and Ireland were both in Europe.

Marcus Rediker's study of the geographical origins of pirates from 1716-1726 gives some interesting data. According to his researched 47.4% were English, 9.8% were Irish, 6.3% were Scottish, 4% were Welsh, about 25% were from America and the West Indies, and 6.9% were from the non-Anglophone world.

As to pirates of the 1730s, I think defining the GAoP is mostly about scale. How many pirates of the 1730s can you name compared to the 17teens and 1720s

[Capt. Sterling]

Sorry not about to read this entire thread, as not personally interested in tattoos, but what were the Jerusalem crosses that are mentioned in Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea?

Edited March 8, 2009 by Capt. Sterling

[Iron Jon]

Sorry not about to read this entire thread, as not personally interested in tattoos, but what were the Jerusalem crosses that are mentioned in Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea?

“In the old City of Jerusalem one afternoon in 1956 I discovered a collection of woodblocks which struck me as unique in character.” So begins John Carswell’s compellingly simple account of his discovery of the remnants of a centuries old tradition of tattooing in the Holy Land that goes back in written records to at least the 1600s and quite possibly much earlier. In the tattoo/coffin-making shop of tattooer/coffin-maker Jacob Razzouk, Carswell recorded the designs of 168 wood blocks that were carved with various, mostly Coptic Christian, tattoo designs. Prominent among them is, of course, the Jerusalem cross. Pilgrims to the Holy City have likely used it for centuries in order to commemorate their journeys.

The symbol of the Jerusalem cross has a long history in the world of Christendom as well as the world of tattooing. Sometimes described as a cross potent between four crosslets or a cross of equal arms, each terminating in a cross bar, there is no mistaking this distinctive and squarish cross symbol out of the dozens of types that have been used in tattoos. Its earliest appearance as a symbol seems to have occurred, not surprisingly, during the first Crusade (1096), in the coat of arms of Godfrey of Bouillon, the first Latin ruler of Jerusalem.

Edited March 9, 2009 by Iron Jon

[MadL]

Sorry Foxe, but not so 'irrelevant' when 90% of th' time "European" is tossed about the description o' red coats or blue coats follow (among other clearly "English" traits 'n traditions). True it be that Germany and Ireland be classified as being located in "Europe", yet it seem so often that Americans when citing history seem t' describe 'Europe' as all being like what is seen in England. The peoples o' Ireland, Germany, France, and Spain are indeed quite different then those from England, different in culture, of dress, of many things. So I am left wondering when one states "not seen in European pirates" do they also include th' French and Spanish? It seems in th' way o' weapons, dress, and personal effects they begin t' site 'English' with disregard t' rest o' 'Europe'. While England paid not much attention t' historic Germany, they were in much battle in Ireland. Irish and Germain peoples where accepted not much better in England then they were in early Colonial America, in many cases just second class citizens, in some select cases not much more then slaves and only suited for work in mines and on rail roads (Germans excepted as they did tend t' be allowed t' keep meager shops, but still not much trusted in main stream 'English' settlements).

While I have not seen a complete list o' th' Whydah's crew, there are a few bios on th' website that site among th' crew was: Welsh, Scottish, Half-blood Mosquito Indian (Bellamy's pilot), African-Dutch, Irish (Bellamy's quartermaster), and an American (born in Rhode Island).

It also states there from 30 to 40 of African decent "all treated as equals". It states about th' half-blood pilot John Julian; "On land, Julian's skin made him a nobody, on water his skill made him a somebody. He eventually piloted the Whydah..." - which also tends t' debunk another statement I once heard that 'English ships were maned by English, Spanish ships by Spanish, French by French' and that where multi-cultured crews did exist the 'dominating culture ruled, the rest while not called slaves pretty much still were' (not exact words but a sum up of them); well, at least th' Pirate ship Whydah did not appear t' conform t' such.

Now if ye had a crew o' rouge sailors that had a mix of cultures on board, and 30 to 40 of them were "of African decent" (which truly would be considered 'unacceptable' by th' English o' period!) and "all where treated as equals" - then somehow I find it hard t' believe that they all looked, dressed, and acted as a proper gentle Englishman would expect them to. Somehow this drums up visions of a truly multi-cultural democracy crew where they may have also shared cultures and ways. Perhaps some of them took an interest in some of the cultures the others on board brought with them....or maybe not, perhaps Bellamy beat them all into dressing and acting English/European and then told them all to "smile for the camera"

[Fox]

Absolutely, of course there were non-English pirates, I don't think I've heard anyone suggest otherwise. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that they were in a minority. As noted, Rediker's multi-crew study (and FWIW I don't believe there is such a thing as a complete Whydah crew list) showed that over a number of pirate ships less than 7% were non-Anglophone. Now, if you or anyone else wants to portray one of that 7% then bravo! - I'm working on kit for a French pirate myself, as well as a Swedish seaman. However, the fact remains that the vast majority of pirates active in the GAoP were English or under English influence, so yes, naturally, that's what most people concentrate on. How many German pirates can you name?

So, I have two questions: what evidence are you using for the appearance of German or Irish seamen? And what makes you say that red/blue coats are particularly "English"?

(Incidentally, if you're bothered about real history then I think you need to re-examine the status of the Irish in England in your period, and rethink the use of the word "Celt")

[Mission]

When I said 'European', I most definitely meant that. If I had meant English, I would have said so. On a related note, I once led a discussion on another forum that was designed to identify pirates of various nationalities which I later copied into this forum called Pirate Nationalities (Origins) that all and sundry are free to browse. It definitely puts the bulk of the named pirates in the English category (it is actually further split to show pirates from Wales and Scotland and so forth, so that should be accounted for when totting up the numbers.) But enough on this irrelevant aside.

I think CrazyColeBlack's point is very interesting as it is contrary to everything else I have read. I thought they were slaves based on you citing your source as "Virginia Runaways “Runaway Slave Advertisements from 18th-century Virginia newspapers." If it is as you say, it is probably the most promising evidence I have seen that white criminals (and pirates were criminals) might have sported tattoos during period for some reason.

As to sailors being regarded as slaves, their implied status is not relevant to my point; only their race is. The two accounts of tattooing from Wafer's account explain where the men he mentions got their tattoos as I noted in my original post. His tats came from the Indians on the Isthmus of Darien. Another man he mentions (Bullman, who wanted "surgeon" Wafer to remove his tattoos) came from time spent among "the Negroes." I figured this referred to the Africans (which could be a mistaken assumption on my part - Bullman may have referred to any dark-skinned people as "Negroes" for all I know - in fact, I believe I have seen people in India referred to that way in some sailor's accounts). Since the Africans were key to the Slave Trade, I thought it would make sense that American slaves would have tattoos if they happened to come from whereever it was that Bullman got inked.

As to conjecture, ever since I was soundly berated for assuming that a mug might be used to drink coffee from (instead of a dish), I try not to conjecture about what might have happened. Instead I look for evidence from period. As I was told then, we could say anything might have happened, but this is not proof.

I don't know much about the Jerusalem Cross, but I do understand that it was a religious symbol and not a secular one. So while it is evidence that tattooing occurred long ago (which I don't think is in question), I am not sure that it proves that people would have run around with tattoos to express their individuality. (I am not sure it would not, but we must always keep in mind that cultural mores were very different during period than they are today.)

[Capt. Sterling]

The symbol of the Jerusalem cross has a long history in the world of Christendom as well as the world of tattooing. Sometimes described as a cross potent between four crosslets or a cross of equal arms, each terminating in a cross bar, there is no mistaking this distinctive and squarish cross symbol out of the dozens of types that have been used in tattoos. Its earliest appearance as a symbol seems to have occurred, not surprisingly, during the first Crusade (1096), in the coat of arms of Godfrey of Bouillon, the first Latin ruler of Jerusalem.

Thanks Iron Jon

[MadL]

However, the fact remains that the vast majority of pirates active in the GAoP were English or under English influence, so yes, naturally, that's what most people concentrate on. How many German pirates can you name?

*German Pirates*

Klaus Störtebeker (pirate or hero, depending on what side o' th' deck ye stand), Barnim VI, Duke of Pomerania, Gottfried Michaelsen, Klein Henszlein, Magister Wigbold, Cord Widderich, Victual Brothers, Hennig Wichmann

(th' rest where so good at it they all got away....un-named)

*Irish Pirates*

Anne Bonny, Edward England, Walter Kennedy, Grace O'Malley

hmmm, th' list does not account for Richard Noland from th' Whydah? - it would appear a 'complete census' is unobtainable from today's lists, without 'complete crew listings....or perhaps ye meant t' say "How may non-anglo CAPTAINS can ye name?"

So, I have two questions: what evidence are you using for the appearance of German or Irish seamen? And what makes you say that red/blue coats are particularly "English"?

As for German or Irish seamen; nay, I am adopting an English appearance, that does not change th' blood what runs through me nor through me character. As ye state, the bloody English ruled th' seas, so I might as well "blend in" - is that not what everyone here keeps saying t' do?

As for "bloody backs" - well, that is just what I see from the military re-enactors, even at last year's last sail fest, they all had on red coats.

(Incidentally, if you're bothered about real history then I think you need to re-examine the status of the Irish in England in your period, and rethink the use of the word "Celt")

*Celts*

Aye, I thought I had read th' statement "Celtic was still very much alive" in a passage on th' "Flight of the earls" (yes, pre-GAoP) but I stand corrected, it was even before then, 13th Century. In th' 16th Century (time of "Flight of the earls") th' history does state"

"Ulster, until this time the most Catholic and Celtic region of Ireland, begins to be transformed into a Protestand stronghold as the Engish set about the process of plantation, it is not the first attempt to form a settlement in Irland..."

(hmmm, sounds like they where actually English, not Irish. Sounds like Irish where still either Catholic or Celitic...aye?)

...'n did I naught state that me mum "fled Ireland"? And as for "real history"; I do not belive I ever stated I was portraying me 'true' ancestor's story.

True it would be that if I where picking a character out of the history book and stating that I be he then I would have much t' consider; but seeing as th' pirate Mad L be a character unto he'm self, THAT gives me legroom t' work with :angry:

[Fox]

*German Pirates*

Klaus Störtebeker (pirate or hero, depending on what side o' th' deck ye stand), Barnim VI, Duke of Pomerania, Gottfried Michaelsen, Klein Henszlein, Magister Wigbold, Cord Widderich, Victual Brothers, Hennig Wichmann

(th' rest where so good at it they all got away....un-named)

*Irish Pirates*

Anne Bonny, Edward England, Walter Kennedy, Grace O'Malley

hmmm, th' list does not account for Richard Noland from th' Whydah? - it would appear a 'complete census' is unobtainable from today's lists, without 'complete crew listings....or perhaps ye meant t' say "How may non-anglo CAPTAINS can ye name?"

No, captains or crew is fine by me, but I wonder how long a list of GAoP era German pirates might be. Odd thing, I've been collecting details on individual pirates from 1690-1730 for some time and I'm slowly assembling into a database: I can name you French and Dutch pirates, a Swede and even one from Switzerland, but none from Germany (or what would become Germany long after the GAoP). Plenty of Irish, but Walter Kennedy's not amongst 'em, he was born in Wapping, London.

As for German or Irish seamen; nay, I am adopting an English appearance, that does not change th' blood what runs through me nor through me character. As ye state, the bloody English ruled th' seas, so I might as well "blend in" - is that not what everyone here keeps saying t' do?

The "bloody" English?

*Celts*

Aye, I thought I had read th' statement "Celtic was still very much alive" in a passage on th' "Flight of the earls" (yes, pre-GAoP) but I stand corrected, it was even before then, 13th Century. In th' 16th Century (time of "Flight of the earls") th' history does state"

"Ulster, until this time the most Catholic and Celtic region of Ireland, begins to be transformed into a Protestand stronghold as the Engish set about the process of plantation, it is not the first attempt to form a settlement in Irland..."

(hmmm, sounds like they where actually English, not Irish. Sounds like Irish where still either Catholic or Celitic...aye?)

Ah, an interesting point, since the "plantation" of Ireland in the 16th century large parts of the country were more English than Irish. By the GAoP the true "wild" Irish had been pretty much Anglicised as well.

In fact, it was the statement about the status of Irish in England that I raised my eyebrow to.

"Celtic" is an interesting one - I'll be very surprised if you can find any 17th or 18thC writer describing contemporary Irish as "Celtic". At that time "Celtic" was applied principally to the ancient race, the romantic notion of spritual Celtishness was very much a 19thC phenomenon.

...And as for "real history"; I do not belive I ever stated I was portraying me 'true' ancestor's story.

True it would be that if I where picking a character out of the history book and stating that I be he then I would have much t' consider; but seeing as th' pirate Mad L be a character unto he'm self, THAT gives me legroom t' work with

Sorry, my mistake, I was under the delusion that Twill was history.

Edited March 9, 2009 by Foxe

[Mission]

Odd thing, I've been collecting details on individual pirates from 1690-1730 for some time and I'm slowly assembling into a database...

Are you building on that list we made? (Foxe was quite instrumental in the creation of the post I mentioned - although that was in the other forum, not this one.)

[Fox]

Not so much. The big limitation with that list (as we knew at the time) was that beyond name and nationality it contained no other information. My database contains fields for name, rank, age, place of birth/habitation, active dates, duration of piratical career, captain(s) served under, literacy, family, fate, and former occupation. For the database to be useful as a tool I've only put people into it when three or more of those fields can be filled. And as I said, I'm also concentrating solely on the GAoP (arbitrarily 1690-1730).

[Mission]

Not so much. The big limitation with that list (as we knew at the time) was that beyond name and nationality it contained no other information. My database contains fields for name, rank, age, place of birth/habitation, active dates, duration of piratical career, captain(s) served under, literacy, family, fate, and former occupation. For the database to be useful as a tool I've only put people into it when three or more of those fields can be filled. And as I said, I'm also concentrating solely on the GAoP (arbitrarily 1690-1730).

Boy, I wish I'd have known before I started reading all these period accounts. I could have given you some extra data. As I remember it, I started that list so that writers could get appropriate names for characters at piracyinfo. It seems like there was another reason, too...

[MadL]

Plenty of Irish, but Walter Kennedy's not amongst 'em, he was born in Wapping, London.

Aye, it appears he was, so does this make him English?:

From Chapter Three, " Who Will Go a Pyrating? "

Walter Kennedy was born at Pelican Stairs, Wapping, the sailor town of London, in 1695, the year in which Henry Avery, " the maritime Robin Hood, " led a mutiny, turned pirate, and captured a treasure ship in the Indian Ocean. Kennedy' s family, like his community, lived by the sea. His father was an anchor-smith " who gave his son Walter the best education he was able. " The times were hard and so was young Kennedy B he was poor, illiterate, known to have " a too aspiring temper, " and often on the wrong side of the law. It was said that in his childhood he was " bred a Pick-Pocket, " and that he later became a house-breaker. Meanwhile he served an apprenticeship to his father, but this came to an abrupt end when the old man died......

.....Sailing now with Bartholomew Roberts (after the death of Davis), Kennedy soon decided to separate. His opportunity came when Roberts took off after a prize, leaving Kennedy, as Lieutenant, in charge of one of the ships, in which he promptly sailed away (in turn leaving Roberts with a certain aversion to Irishmen ever after)....

And from another common found blurb on Walter:

Walter Kennedy (died 19 July 1721) was an Irish pirate who served as a crew member under Howell Davis and Bartholomew Roberts. He was one of six men, including Howell Davis, who mutinied, seized the sloop Buck and took to piracy. Davis was elected captain. Kennedy was with Davis on the island of Principe when his party was ambushed by the Portuguese, and was one of only two members of the shore party to be able to escape back to the ship. With Davis dead, Bartholomew Roberts was elected as his successor. When Roberts and forty of the crew chased a possible prize in a captured sloop off the coast of Surinam, Kennedy was left in charge of Roberts' ship, the Rover, and a large part of its crew. He took advantage of this to abandon Roberts and proclaim himself captain.

Kennedy headed for Ireland, but having no skill in navigation landed on the north-west coast of Scotland instead. Seventeen of the crew were arrested near Edinburgh and put on trial for piracy, with nine of them being hanged. Kennedy himself was able to reach London where he is said to have kept a brothel in the Deptford Road. When one of his prostitutes accused him of theft, he was sent to the Bridewell prison, where he was denounced as a pirate by the mate of a ship he had taken. Kennedy was transferred to the Marshalsea prison and put on trial for piracy. He was hanged at Execution Dock on 19 July, 1721.

That one however makes no notion o' his birth place but does appear t' acknowledge th' statement of:

"His opportunity came when Roberts took off after a prize, leaving Kennedy, as Lieutenant, in charge of one of the ships, in which he promptly sailed away (in turn leaving Roberts with a certain aversion to Irishmen ever after)."

Sorry, my mistake, I was under the delusion that Twill was history.

Oh, m'bad then. See'n as how there be no historical record o' a German lad having ever met an Irish lass in England and having a half-breed offspring that later took t' pirating as well as it be true that there appear t' be no records of Germanic pirates during th' GAoP, I will drag me carcass out o' yer beloved Captain Twill fer this German-Irish American has no desire t' portray what he is naught ('n aye, I did said "bloody English")

[Fox]

Apologies, wasn't trying to be antagonistic, was merely trying to point out in a tongue in cheek way that if you bring your character in here then he's going to get historified. Should have added a smiley, sorry.