America Founded by Pyrates?

[DirectorDave]

I'm pursuing a story about the American armed forces recruiting pyrates to fight the British fleet during the American Revolution.

I was told that they did this because a Navy did not exist at the time, and Pyrates were the best resources.

True? Or just an ol Pyrate's tale...

[Lady Seahawke]

From my studies, true enough. In fact many of our Founding Fathers were in volved with smuggling, privateers, and pyrates as a manner of doing business. This was just a way to get around the excessive British taxes. So, they wouldn't think twice to hire their friends to roust the Royalies.

[blackjohn]

I'm pursuing a story about the American armed forces recruiting pyrates to fight the British fleet during the American Revolution.

That sounds neat. Fwiw, I should've been in Williamsburg filming some scenes for a documentary on the surrendur at Yorktown this weeknd, but I've come down with something and decided to stay home instead.

I was told that they did this because a Navy did not exist at the time, and Pyrates were the best resources.

True? Or just an ol Pyrate's tale...

Well, it is true that privateers were heavily relied upon, but completely false that the Continental Navy did not exist. In the library where I work, we have at least four volumes of Continental Navy records from the Rev War.

You may want to find a copy of Pirates and Patriots of the American Revolution. You should be able to find one for a reasonable price.

[Matusalem]

I know one thing...the American Revolution started with the burning of the HMS Gaspee in 1772 in Narragansett bay in Rhode Island, which happened what was then known as Namquid Point. (now Gaspee point)

The HMS Gaspee was pretty much the scourge of piracy between New York and Boston.

Basically, a bunch of local "privateers" launched a night attack aboard the Gaspee, swordfights and all, then shot the captain Lt. Dudingston rights quare in the family jewels, and set alight the ship.

Rhode Island was pretty much a pirate's nest, given the fact that Newport (Hometown of Thomas Tew, and stopover port for Kidd and Bellamy) is separated from the mainland, and the pirates could sail out at a moment's notice into the open ocean.

This site has all the info:

http://www.gaspee.org/

[blackjohn]

That reminds me of one of my favorite revwar tunes. I don't remember the whole of it, but I do remember:

We shipped with Captain Whipple

Who never knew of fear

The Captain of the Providence

The Yankee privateer.

Hey... wait a minute, I thought the revolution started with the Boston Massacre in 1770!?!

[Deadeye]

Well i know this much, as we have learned in our Naval History Classes in Bootcamp...

The Continental Navy was founded on October 13, 1775, before the official onset of the war. But from what I remember, the Continentals did not have any large men-o-war, and mostly had sloops and some brigs, so privateering would have most likely been lucrative buisness.

If my memory serves me, John Paul Jones was a privateer himself when he took the Bonhomme Richard to Brittan. If I am mistaken, please make it known to me....

[blackjohn]

Basically, you are right. We built one large ship and gave it to the French as I recall. The USN had a few good commanders, but they couldn't really go toe-to-toe with the RN. It's a good thing France came over to our side. Without their navy at the Virigina Capes we might have lost at Yorktown. Our privateers did make a killing. And... if I was at work, I'd be able to give some numbers. I have a large poster about the Continental Navy hanging on the wall of my cube.

I seem to recall Jones actually landed a force in England and did a small raid. Got away with some guys silver? Something like that. More a moral victory than anything else. Pretty neat stuff.

[Mad Matt]

"During the American Revolution" is a pretty broad time period. For the report, you should use specific dates. The Navy was established 13 October, 1775.

Establishment of the Marine Corps, 10 November 1775

This resolution of the Continental Congress marked the establishment of what is now the United States Marine Corps.

“Resolved, That two Battalions of marines be raised, consisting of one Colonel, two Lieutenant Colonels, two Majors, and other officers as usual in other regiments; and that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken, that no persons be appointed to office, or enlisted into said Battalions, but such as are good seamen, or so acquainted with maritime affairs as to be able to serve to advantage by sea when required: that they be enlisted and commissioned to serve for and during the present war between Great Britain and the colonies, unless dismissed by order of Congress: that they be distinguished by the names of the first and second battalions of American Marines, and that they be considered part of the number which the continental Army before Boston is ordered to consist of."

Taken from the Navy history's website:

The United States Navy traces its origins to the Continental Navy, which the Continental Congress established on 13 October 1775 by authorizing the procurement, fitting out, manning, and dispatch of two armed vessels to cruise in search of munitions ships supplying the British Army in America. The legislation also established a Naval Committee to supervise the work. All together, the Continental Navy numbered some fifty ships over the course of the war, with approximately twenty warships active at its maximum strength.

All this of course being after the GAoP, however piracy was still prevalent.

And just a bit more to help you out:

Beginning with early 1775 actions in coastal waters, followed by Commodore Esek Hopkins' 1776 amphibious assault to capture military stores at New Providence, Bahamas, and reaching a climax in 1781 when French fleet action off the Virginia Capes led to victory at Yorktown, the war at sea was decisive in the Nation's struggle for independence. Small and fragmented American naval forces lacked the capabilities for major fleet engagements, but their contributions were crucial to failure or success. General Washington's fleet schooners, the Continental Navy, states navies, and privateers captured numerous enemy merchant ships to provide vitally needed supplies for the hard-pressed Army. On occasion armed vessels transported Washington's troops, and joined in the defense of important port cities -- New York, Philadelphia, Charleston. American naval officers including John Barry, Nicholas Biddle, Abraham Whipple, and Joshua Barney carried the patriotic cause to sea against the overwhelming strength of Britain's Royal Navy. Operations in European waters, especially John Paul Jones' celebrated Bonhomme Richard-Serapis battle, brought the war to England's shores.

[Ship's Gunner]

Ahoy Shipmates,

"If my memory serves me, John Paul Jones was a privateer himself when he took the Bonhomme Richard to Brittan. If I am mistaken, please make it known to me...."

Actually, Jones was a commissioned officer in the Continental Navy when he commanded Bonhomme Richard, and his crew was mostly regularly enlisted into the Navy. The exceptions were 137 French Marines, and possibly 36 French landsmen who had shipped aboard in Brittany. He did have a couple of French privateers in his squadron when he set to sea, but they soon disappeared, leaving him in company with a 32 gun frigate, the Alliance, commanded by the erratic (actually, probably insane) Pierre Landais. Landais and Alliance proved to be more of an impediment than an assistance to Jones, actually unleashing two broadsides into Bonhomme Richard during the epic battle against HMS Serapis off Flamborough Head, on September 23, 1789. (Jones preferred charges against Landais, and he was eventually dismissed from the Continental Navy.)

The incident in which Jones' men took silver was on his previous voyage, in command of Ranger. On the evening April 22, 1778, Jones led two boatloads of volunteers from Ranger into the port of Whitehaven, and set fire to several ships there, but the local inhabitants were able to extinguish the blazes before any real damage was done. (They were aided by a heavy rainstorm, which also served to assist Jones and his men in making their getaway.)The next day Ranger crossed Solway Firth to St. Mary's Isle, home of the Earl of Selkirk. Jones planned to capture Selkirk, and then offer him to the British in exchange for American seamen being held prisoner. Unfortunately for Jones, the Earl was not at home, and he wanted to abandon the expedition. His men, however, wanted SOMETHING to show for all their trouble, and insisted on making off with Selkirk's substantial store of silver. (Evidently, although the crew of Ranger was enlisted into the Continental Navy, and Jones was by most accounts a firm disciplinarian, there was a bit of the unruly privateer spirit among them.) Jones allowed his men to take the silver, but then purchased it from them and later returned it to Selkirk's family.

Source: The U.S. Navy, An Illustrated History, by Nathan Miller, Naval Institute Press, 1977

Respectfully Your Shipmate,

Chad Teasley

Ship's Gunner

[DirectorDave]

Would any of the key figures of the American Revolution (including Washington) have ever interacted with or commissioned pyrates?

[blackjohn]

I doubt it. I don't know alot about the Continental navy, nor the navy's of each state, but I suspect the commisioning of sailors of questionable repute (or any repute) as privateers was handled through lower levels of the Continental Congress or representatives of each state.

I'll dig through some books when I get a chance and see what turns up.

[Mad Matt]

Just a couple more sites to peruse in regards to privateers in the American Revolution. There is even a newspaper ad for sailors to board a privateer ship!

http://www.usmm.org/revolution.html

http://www.nps.gov/revwar/about_the_revolu...privateers.html

[blackjohn]

I did a teeny bit of research this morning and found a passage in a book about Washington hiring privateers. I need to do some more research.

There was an incredible about of small ship action in the Chesapeake during the revwar in the form of a continuing guerilla naval war between the Tories (known as picaroons) and the Americans.

DirectorDave, I don't mean to insult you by asking this, I just don't know that it is ever safe to assume things - do you know the difference between privateers and pirates? If so, my apologies.

[DirectorDave]

No insult at all!

My limited understanding is that a privateer is an independent contractor (not necessarily a pirate), while a pirate is also an independent contractor, but someone who acts in an unlawful way (to put it nicely).

Does that cover it, or am I waaaaay off?

[blackjohn]

That pretty much covers it. A privateer is working under a set of guidelines issued from a government. He carries onboard a legal document, a Letter of Marque and Preprisal, which gives him the legal right to attack those enemies set forth in said document. Wikipedia has this to say.

Pirates are criminals who attack ships to steal things - cargo, equipment, people. Note, privateers sometimes skirt the edge. Identifying an enemy vessels was often a difficult task.

[Caraccioli]

Privateers sometimes turned to piracy. The letter of the marque gave the privateer the "right" to plunder selected nation's ships on behalf of the issuing nation. When the privateers could find no ships of that nation, some took whatever they ships they could find, regardless of nationality. Thus a privateer could turn pirate. (This has no reflection on the government issuing the letter of the marque, however.)

Also, keep in mind that one nation's privateer was another nation's pirate. The Spanish thought of English privateers as nothing more than pirates with paperwork. ("Pirates with Paperwork" would make a fine short story topic.)

Using privateers is actually a pretty good strategy for a fledgling nation. Low cost, possible destruction of the enemy. In fact, it's a pretty good strategy for any nation who is at war.

One thought occurs to me, though: The US could not truly have privateers until they became an independent nation. Before then, they have no ability to issue valid letters of marque. (Also, I seem to recall hearing...somewhere...that US issued letters of the marque were not given much credence in the late 18th century. I can't back that up, though.)

I do think it's a long stretch to say that the US was founded by pirates. Certain corrupt governors, landowners, portmasters and whatnot did profit richly from the activity of piracy because the US had little ability to stop it, given their limited waterborne military. But that's an individual act, not a unified government-focused effort. I guess you could argue that the sum of the individual acts helped found the government, but that seems pretty weak - the corrupt citizens probably kept most of their ill-gotten booty. The government had bigger fish to fry until the 19th century, when they began to deal with piracy in earnest.

[the Royaliste]

I generally 'skip' these discussions, but..ye blokes 'ave some 'o yer facts all screwed up.

1.Privateers were vessels specifically built and used to raid commerce. 'Letters of Marque' were merchant vessels outfitted to work as privateers.

2. The Continental Navy was small and fledgling, but some state Navies were huge, with two states having over 500 vessels apiece.

3.Non recoginition of American rights on the sea and the impressment of American seamen by England led to the War of 1812. (the war in which 'pirate' Jean LaFitte saved our bacon,even tho the 'war' was officially over).

For authentication, see 'Ships and Seamen of the American Revolution', by Jack Coggins, and Howard Chappelle's 'American Sailing Navy'.

[blackjohn]

I generally 'skip' these discussions, but..ye blokes 'ave some 'o yer facts all screwed up.

1.Privateers were vessels specifically built and used to raid commerce. 'Letters of Marque' were merchant vessels outfitted to work as privateers.

My good sir, I believe you are mistaken, or I have misread this part of your post. Privateers carried Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Some privateer ships were converted merchant vessels, others were purpose-built. Refer, if you will, to this article from James Madison University:

http://www.jmu.edu/madison/center/main_pag...er/overview.htm

For authentication, see 'Ships and Seamen of the American Revolution', by Jack Coggins, and Howard Chappelle's 'American Sailing Navy'.

Both very good books to be sure!

[the Royaliste]

'Ships and Seamen of the American Revolution',Jack Coggins, 1969, Chapter 8, Privateers, paragraph 6, I quote..."(Most historians and writers class privately owned vessels which operated against the enemy under government comission as "privateers". To be precise, a privateer was a vessel fitted out as a warship and primarily intended to cruise against enemy merchantmen. It was not uncommon, however, for a government commission to be issued to an armed cargo-carrier, in which case the vessel was known as a letter of marque. The distinction is a nice one, but one customarily made in contemporary accounts and which, if not understood, may cause confusion among modern readers.)

Puurrrrrfectly clear to me, eh?..This publication is a primary seller in every maritime museum in which I've participated. Said maritime museums restore, build, and promote Tallships , so...I figure their volumes are concise.

On a prior claim, without trying to step on anyone's local pride, altho' the Gaspee was taken in 1772 and burned, the revenue sloop Liberty was burned at Newport R.I. in 1769, and the British schooner St. John was fired upon by Rhode Islanders in 1764....

[blackjohn]

Point taken. Now lets see if I've got this nailed down and if we are on the same page. A "letter of marque" is term for a ship technically operating as a merchantman but carrying a legal document called a Letter of Marque and Reprisal which states that said ship may operate against enemy shipping. A "privateer" is a vessel outfitted as a raider, either a purpose built vessel or converted merchant, which carries a Letter of Marque and Reprisal stating that said ship may operate against enemy shipping.

How's that? Seems there is a distinct difference between letter of marque (as a vessel) and Letter of Marque and Reprisal (a license to attack the enemy).

And thanks for the clarification. I appreciate your knowledge.