Prize Money?

[Swashbuckler 1700]

Lately I have been studying naval traditions of Gaop

Now I am wondering prize money.At least accordingly to Wikipedia (yes yes) The prize money as it was know in Nelson's era was established in 1708 and it suffered only minor changes before Napoleonic wars ended. Though there had been rather similar system earlier in the 17th century...

" This practice was formalised via the Cruisers and Convoys Act of 1708. An Admiralty Prize Court was established to evaluate claims and condemn prizes, and the scheme of division of the money was specified. This system, with minor changes, lasted throughout the colonial, Revolutionary, and Napoleonic wars."

​Also as another modern source here is said similarly

"In 1708 the British government enacted the 'Cruizer and Convoys Act'. One of its effects was to formalize the process of prize taking, giving practically all the money gained from the capture of enemy vessels to the captors 'for the better and more effectual encouragement of the Sea Service'. Every prize appeared before the High Court of Admiralty for 'condemnation'. It laid down exact regulations for dividing the proceeds among the various interested parties."

So I think this is true.

So in the Gaop I am most interested about (1710-1726) Navy had a clear prize money system.

However looking the origins of the term I wonder. The term "prize" meaning a prize ship was commonly used at least before 1712 when Woodes Rogers' "A Cruising Voyage Round the World" was written (yes I know there are certainly earlier meantions but it was the earliest book that I could think now). However the actual "prize money" is not so old if we trust this dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prize+money the term has its origins in the 1740s.

I disagree as I have reasons. Fistly "prize" meaning captured vessel was a common term before that and so was "money".

Also at least an earlier mention in 1728 of the actual "prize money" appears:

The history of the pyrates: containing the lives of Captain Mission. Captain Bowen. Captain Kidd ... and their several crews (1728 edition) (can be read here http://digital.lib.ecu.edu/17002)

page 377 Of captain Nathaniel North

the same section than the one I referred in Press gang thread. (note that North here sailed in the late 17th century but the book account was written in 1728...)

"He then went on board a Privateer again, and made several Prizes, two of which were English Bottoms, and sued for by former Owners; North thinking it hard to venture his Life, and have Part of his Prize Money taken away, and the Press being hot in Jamaica, he resolved to sail no more with the English; but went to Curasoe into the Dutch Service, and sail'd with a Spanish Trader to the Coast of New Spain several Voyages. In the last he made,"

So we have "prizes" in early Gaop and "prize money" at least in 1728. I think the prize money as a term was used years earlier.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Swashbuckler 1700

[Mission]

Prize seems to have a long history according to etymology online (which I like better than most such things, although I did find a word in print before the earliest date they give for it - sorry, I don't remember what it was). Anyhow:

prize (n.2) ... "to take, seize," from Latin prendere, contraction of prehendere "lay hold of, grasp, seize, catch" (see prehensile). Especially of ships captured at sea (1510s). The spelling with -z- is from late 16c.

Unfortunately, they don't list the phrase 'prize-money'. However, money goes way back as well, so I don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that the two things would be put together when a sailor was talking about getting their share long before it appeared in print, so I would be inclined to agree with your conclusion.

Although, as you already know, if you can't produce definitive proof, you can't say it was in use with any authority.

[landlubbersanonymous]

Although, as you already know, if you can't produce definitive proof, you can't say it was in use with any authority.

Mission - Sans Stynky, Foxe, GOF, and perhaps a handful of others, you're the closest thing to authority most of us will ever need or want.

I believe it reasonable to say that the vast majority on this here forum would entrust no one other than yourself, regionally or internationally, with an inquiry or the treatment of a toothache, a case of pox... or any number of afflictions for that matter be they physical, philosophical or spiritual.

[Mission]

Try using me as a definitive voice of authority when defending your doctoral thesis on the use of the word 'prize-money' in the GAoP and see how that goes for you. Foxe has published, peer-reviewed work, so you have a better chance using him.

(Stynky is another matter entirely. If he told the most tenured professor to purchase a bottle of mead so that he could share it with us, the prof would pop for the punch without a peep. Now that's authority/)

[Daniel]

Foxe and I talked a little about this in this thread: https://pyracy.com/index.php/topic/16862-prize-money-questions/ . He said that before 1708, privateer prizes were normally condemned to be sold in a regular Vice-Admiralty court, as opposed to the specialized prize courts set up by the Cruizers and Convoys Act. We didn't actually discuss whether naval prizes were condemned in the same way, but I assume they must have been.

On privateers, though, the distribution of the money would have been regulated by the articles of the individual privateer, which always guaranteed a large portion for the men (no purchase, no pay and all that). On naval vessels, there weren't any individual articles on each ship, and I'm not sure Blake's Laws of War and Ordinances of the Sea said anything about how to distribute money from captured prizes.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Daniel