Royal Navy Renegades

[corsair2k3]

Greetings,

On another thread, it's been suggested that many pirates were former Royal Navy men.

As far as the period 1700-1725 is concerned, I can (from the top of my head) list the following pirate captains who reportedly had RN in their backgrounds:

-Nathaniel North

-John Bowen (gotta doublecheck)

-Thomas White ("pretty sure")

-William Kidd

-Richard Holland

-William Moody (gotta doublecheck this'un)

-Walter Kennedy

-John Taylor

Who am I missing?

Regards,

The Corsair

www.whydah.com

[JoshuaRed]

During times of war, that vast majority of pirates were from merchant ships. But when the navys were demobilized after war, the ports were flooded with out of work naval sailors, many of which probably went on the account now and again while waiting for another war.

For example, at the end of Queen Anne's War in 1713, the Royal Navy demobilized, and in two years went from 49,860 men to 13,475. * (From Rediker's "Between The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea")

[corsair2k3]

No quarrel with that--but how is that reflected by actual evidence, that's my question.

Intuitively, it seems reasonable that discharged navy men would have flocked to the pirates in droves.

But it just seems to me that far more are reported as having privateer andor merchant mariner backgrounds--for the period after 1690 anyway.

Might it have been the case that ex-RN personnel got a lot of the merchant mariners' jobs--thus displacing the latter?

Not sure we can ever come to a definitive answer, but is, I think, worth discussing.

Best,

The Corsair

www.whydah.com

[JoshuaRed]

That's a good theory, about naval sailors filling the gaps on merchant ships. I think some pirate crews began with a few naval-skilled sailors, who then swelled their ranks by pressing men from merchants. Some, but definitely not all.

[corsair2k3]

I definitely agree that one can identify a hard-core cadre (with an outer circle of the less-commited) within most pirate crews.

Time for some homemade soup and a glance at the books to see which RN renegades I've missed.

The Corsair

www.whydah.com

[dasNdanger]

Now first of all, PROMISE not to laugh...k??

I found this little bit in the T-L Seafarers/Pirates book...perhaps not the best source material, not sure. Anyway, it reads:

Some of the pirates were deserters from Royal Navy warships. Other Navy men drifted into piracy through unemployment caused by the laying up of fighting ships at the end of foreign wars. "War is no sooner ended," John Graves, the Bahamas' collector for Customs wrote in 1706, "but the West Indies always swarm with pirates."

But the vast majority of pirates was drawn from the crews of ordinary merchant ships.

Of course, this isn't really anything that hasn't been said - except for what Graves states, which I take to mean that as soon as the wars ended, the Indies were swarming with pirates, supporting what JR mentioned earlier.

Personally, I wouldn't imagine a 'majority' of navy men turning to piracy RIGHT out of the navy. But what about men who had once served in the navy and then went to merchants before turning pirate? There is no way of knowing just how many had navy 'experience' sometime in their lives, besides the ones who were famous enough to end up in history books.

Another thing I wonder about is the reporting of men who turned to piracy. I can imagine merchant ships keeping a pretty accurate count, because these men, whether through capture or mutiny, became pirates in the performance of a crime - making it more likely to end up in a report somewhere. But navy men either turned pirate during times of peace (when it would be hard to keep track of their actions), or through desertion. Now, let's take the latter - I'm not so sure the Navy would want it to be common knowledge how many men may have slipped out from under the King's or Queen's nose in the pursuit of wealth through piracy, ESPECIALLY if they were not caught and brought to justice. Not something you want the rest of the poor, oppressed bastards on your decks knowing about. So the navy MAY have reported the deserters, but I doubt - even if it was highly suspected - that they would ever suggest the deserters had turned to piracy.

das

[Fox]

One important thing to consider is that for many men who weren't of commissioned rank the RN was simply a job, not a career. Men could move in and out of the Navy as their service was required.

One year Jack Matelot was aboard a merchantman, the next he was in the RN, the next voyage he went on might br a privateering trip, then back in the Navy, then on a merchantman but pressed at the Nore into the Navy again, then a merchant trip to Bermuda, then captured by pirates, and finally execution dock.

Was he a merchant seaman or a Navy seaman? Neither, he was just a seaman.

This of course doesn't apply to commissioned officer, middies, lieutenants, captains etc, nor to some warrant officers; boatswain and master, plus perhaps their mates. It could however apply to any of the men, plus many of the lower officers and artisans.

Out of period, and off topic really, but I can't resist sharing this. Vice-Admiral William Monson writing of his expedition against Irish and Scottish pirates in 1614:

"Being now come to the well-head of all pirates and being desirous of resolving myself, as well by some act of heresay, of the conditions of those people of Boradhaven, as soon as I came to an anchor I made choice of such persons of my company as formerly had been pirates, to give the less suspicion of my purpose..."

Whether RN men became pirates may be debateable, but the opposite was apparently true!

[Nelson Cooke]

This isn't so much as a statistic, but irony. Dana says it was the puny ration of grog that irked the Navy men most of all, and ranked among their chief motivations for going on the account. Ironically, many of these men had enlisted in the Navy in hope that the very same grog limit, as well as the job’s regular hours and strenuous exercise, might provide an asylum for their alcoholism.

[JoshuaRed]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't proper grog only date back to circa 1740-50? For our period it was probably lack of smallbeer or punch?

[dasNdanger]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't proper grog only date back to circa 1740-50? For our period it was probably lack of smallbeer or punch?

YER WRONG!!!!

hehehe - nah, actually, ye be right... :)

Pilfered this excellent information from the Pusser's Rum site (me personal fav):

For well over 300 years, Great Britain's Royal Navy issued a daily "tot" of Pusser's Rum to the crews of their ships - and always a double issue before battle and after victory! First introduced into the Navy in 1655 as a substitute for beer, by 1731, it [rum] was in general use.

And the name Pusser's? Nothing more than a corruption of the word "purser". On board ship, the purser was responsible for ship's stores - including the rum. Everything that came from the purser was called "Pusser's" -- and still is today. Hence the name Pusser's Rum!

The history of rum in Great Britain's Royal Navy was largely that of social change, both in England and the Royal Navy. From 1650 throughout the 18th century, shipboard life was incredibly difficult. The daily issue of Pusser's Rum was the highlight of the day. Then, too in those days, battles were fought "eyeball-to-eyeball". The mental alertness and courage required to pack a cannonball into a muzzle loader were far different from that required to operate the modern weapon systems of today...

On the Origin of "Grog" and Vernon's Orders

Over the centuries, the amount of rum changed from time to time. Prior to 1740, Pusser's Rum was issued to the men neat, that is without water. They received 1/2-pint twice daily! Admiral Vernon (pictured at right), the hero of Portobello and the Commander-in-Chief, West Indies Station was very much concerned with what he called the swinish vice of drunkenness which he believed was caused by the men drinking their daily allowance of rum neat, that is without water. He believed that if the same amount of rum was mixed with water, and then consumed that it would reduce drunkenness and discipline problems for which the punishment could be brutal. Thus he issued his infamous Order to Captains No. 349 on August 21, 1740. His order stated that the daily allownace of rum "be every day mixed with the proportion of a quart of water to a half pint of rum, to be mixed in a scuttled butt kept for that purpose, and to be done upon the deck, and in the presence of the Lieutenant of the Watch who is to take particular care to see that the men are not defrauded in having their full allowance of rum... and let those that are good husband men receive extra lime juice and sugar that it be made more palatable to them."

The sailors, or "Jack Tars" had affectionately nicknamed Admiral Vernon "Old Grog" from the "grogram" cloak he often wore on the quarter deck. The watered rum gave great offence to the men, and soon they began referring to it contemptuously as "Grog" from the name they'd already provided Admiral Vernon. Thus, true Grog is Pusser's Rum and water with lime juice and sugar!

The "scuttled butt" in Vernon's Order eventually became the "Grog Tub" from which the daily Grog was issued. Petty Officers received their Pusser's Rum 'neat' directly from the Spirit Room at 1100 hours daily when the bos'n piped "Up Spirits!" to herald the event. The issue of Grog to the rest of the sailors followed one hour later.

Changes in the Issue

The ration - or tot - was later increased to two parts water and one part rum, and in 1756, the daily ration of Pusser's Rum was increased to one pint per day, per man. Finally, just before the tot ritual ended in 1970, it was reduced to one-eighth pint... (Entire article: http://www.pussers.com/rum/history )

So, it seems that during the GAoP - the navy would have been drinking either straight rum, or perhaps still forcing down skunky beer. This is interesting, because I knew about the change from straight rum to grog, but I never paid attention to WHEN the change went into effect (another reason I heard for the grog is that it couldn't be 'hoarded'. Sailors would save up their rum rations sometimes, drinking it all in one session, leading to many shipboard problems. Grog, however, will go bad if saved more than a couple days, and anyone drinking it would get very sick. Thus serving grog prevented 'binge drinking').

Hmmm...so, using the term 'grog' in association with the GAoP is flatout wrong - no question there!

das

[Fox]

Although the earliest issue of rum to the Navy can possibly be dated back to 1655 (when Englishmen captured Jamaica), beer remained the official issue until 1831, though it could be substitued by wine or spirits (not just rum) at the Captain's discretion. The first Navy-wide issue of rum only dates to 1844

Thus, while "grog" certainly isn't authentic for GAoP, drinking beer certainly is (one gallon per man per day), and there is no reason to suppose that watered down rum isn't either. Vernon didn't invent grog, he just made it official and gave it a name.

[JoshuaRed]

Thanks das and Foxe!

doesn't proper grog only date back to circa 1740-50

That's exactly what I was getting at, was the "official" birth of grog.

[corsair2k3]

I might have to rethink my original stance about RN types serving under the black flag.

I was pretty mortified when somebody reminded me offlist that Every had been RN.

The Corsair

Who is wondering now about Roberts...

[JoshuaRed]

Yes but wasn't Every quite young while in the RN? Like 15?

[dasNdanger]

Hey, Do pirates who served in the navies of other countries count?? Wasn't de Grammont in the French Navy?? Not 100% sure - been a while since I read about him...

das

[Fox]

I'm not sure that de Grammont was in the French Navy (I forget), but he did have dinner at John Evelyn's house with the notorious Colonel Blood. If we believe the Misson story (which I do not personally) then he was in the French navy.

Corsair, Avery may have been in the navy but he didn't sail under a black flag did he? <private joke>

Actually, I really should have thought of Avery myself. I'm doing some work on pirates in ballads and have made an interesting connection. The song "High Barbary" may well date back to the 17th century, and one particularly early set of words includes the ship Prince Rupert. There has only been one Rupert in the Royal Navy, launched in 1667 and the ship on which Avery apparently served.

So, early in his career the "Arch-Pirate" may have served as a pirate hunter. Out of interest, most of the voyages to the Mediterranean made by the English navy of that period were commanded by Admiral Sir Thomas Allin, himself a former pirate...

Actually, the story of Avery illustrates the point I was trying to make in my earlier post, that even if someone served on a merchantman or privateer immediately before becoming a pirate there's no reason to suppose they didn't serve on a Royal Navy ship before that. Unless someone is prepared to research the life history of every pirate we know of then I suspect that a lot more served in the RN at some point in their careers than we imagine.