The Jolly Roger

[Mick MacAnselan]

I don't know any serious 'reenactors' that use a skull and crossbones on anything other than a flag. And to my knowledge, there's zero historical basis to do so. Otherwise, the only thing that comes to mind is the death's head of memento mori on tombstones and jewelry, but that's got nothing to do with pirates.

[Fox]

FWIW I think Mick has the right of it. The skull and cross bones was used on graves and as personal memento mori, but its piratical application was confined to flags.

[John Maddox Roberts]

That confirms my thoughts on the matter.

[Captain Jim]

Dated to the mid 1700's, slightly out of period, but close. At the Pirate Soul museum, Key West. This falls under the category of religeous relic though.

[kass]

Pretty typical momento mori there, Jim. Doesn't have anything really to do with pirates unless the provenance of the piece is definitively known.

[Captain Jim]

Agreed.

Gratuitous use of the skull and bones to advertise "I am a pyrate" would have been a self-signed death warrant.

[Fox]

The other thing to remember about the skull and cross bones is that although it was probably the most popular image used in pirate flags it was by no means a universal symbol of piracy (at a rough count only something less than a third of known pirate flags had a skull and cross bones on them). So it's not really like wearing it on, say, your hat would mark you out as a pirate even if you did wish to be so identified.

[JoshuaRed]

Wearing a skull n' bones around would probaby just peg you as a person in mourning for a recently lost family member or spouse.

[kass]

Or someone not in mourning. Momento mori were really common jewelry motifs in the 17th century. They weren't meant to be morbid. Just to remind you of your mortality.

[Lady Seahawke]

The other angle of it is Skull and cross-bones used in Carribean Vodoun rites...using said image on a person could identify one as being a pracititioner.

[blackjohn]

What Ed said... and I'll add, I have seen a pocket watch from the 1600s in the shape of a skull (might have had x-bones on it too, it has been a long time).

[Mission]

Just wanted to record this before I finished the book and sent it back to the library. It's from William Funnell's A Voyage Round the World. They were on Dampier's privateer St. George attacking a Spanish Man of War. The journal entry date is July 22, 1704:

"So hoisting the bloody Flag at our Main top-mast Head, with a resolution neither to give nor take Quarter, we began the fight, and went to it as fast as we could load and fire."

[Captain Jim]

As far as I know, little or no truth in the skull and cross bones being the signal for an infected ship. It was a pretty universal symbol of death and mortality (hence the use of it by pirates), so it's possible it was used to signify a plague ship, but it certainly wasn't universal.

The use of a yellow flag for plague ships (technically, it just means the ship is in quarantine - might be flown if there's a particularly bad outbreak of athlete's foot or wind) certainly doesn't date back to the golden age. I don't know if it stems from the "I" flag, it might, it might not - 19th century flags ain't something I know a huge amount about.

Ships entering port and not yet cleared to land today fly the quarantine flag whether there is sickness aboard or not. It is simply a signal that a ship or boat has arrived from a foreign port and the port surgeon has not yet reviewed their vaccinations or port of origin to determine whether it is safe to allow them free access to the port.

[Mission]

Ships entering port and not yet cleared to land today fly the quarantine flag whether there is sickness aboard or not. It is simply a signal that a ship or boat has arrived from a foreign port and the port surgeon has not yet reviewed their vaccinations or port of origin to determine whether it is safe to allow them free access to the port.

They had a sort of quarantine in some ports during period. It was called pratique [or some random spelling variation thereof] and seemed to come from the Mediterranean countries. I'm putting a whole section in my book on this and I have a ton of quotes from just about anyone who sailed there, but this is the most descriptive:

“We came up close to the mouth of the haven of Messina, and sticking the ship ashore under the trees, ran hastily with a halser and fastened to one of them… After we had been a while there, no one suffered to come ashore, we are all hands called out of the ship and directed to a small quadrangle, where an old fellow, perusing the bill of health we had from Genoa, puts on a great pair of spectacles as big as saucers and, making each man expose his groins and armpits, he looks into them and with a stick thrusts in them, where, finding nothing, we are allowed prattick, and then went into the town. One of our men who came from Genoa with a bubo [from Gonorrhea] was quite cured, for I purged and seated it off, so as he was well and nothing showed but the want of hair, tho our man earnestly lookt into it and see if he could find what he suspected.” (James Yonge, Yonge, James, The Journal of James Yonge [1647-1721] Plymouth Surgeon, p. 75)

There's nothing in my notes about a flag, though. They just had to stay in a certain place in the harbor from what I can tell.

[Mission]

Here's the last bit from David Marley's somewhat disappointingly footnoted book Daily Life of Pirates before returning it to the library stacks. This is about flags and some of it actually is sourced, which is helpful. (Although I tried to track down the original sources and failed to do that.)The first one calls back to Daniel's original comment starting this thread.

The earliest recorded instance of the display of a black flag is believed to have occurred in July 1700, when Captain John Cranby of the HMS Poole described the French corsair Emmanuel Wynne's ship as having been chased ashore at the Cape Verde Islands while fighting under 'a sable ensign with crossbones, a Death's head, and an hour glass' (the latter to signify that the opponent's time was running out)." (Marley, p. 181)

While that quote is not sourced, it does give the name of the person who is supposed to have reported this, which is more than I've seen so far in this thread. (It may be noted in another flag thread on the Pub, though.)

"Although the colorful expression 'skull-and-crossbones' did not enter into common usage in the English language until much later on, a report submitted to London from Governor Walter Hamilton of the Antillean Island of Antigua on December 14, 1716 (O.S.) [Er, Marley explains somewhat sniffily that this means Old Style dates in the beginning of his book. This would take to long to explain, but if you're curious, look here.] described a recent spate of attacks perpetrated in those waters by Sam Bellamy - and specifically mentioned how his pirate sloop Mary Anne had run down a hapless pair of trading vessels near the Dutch island of Sabá while flying a large black flag emplazoned with 'a Deaths Head and Bones a-cross.' [Footnote 14: Calendar of State Papers, Colonial: America and West Indies, vol. 29 (London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1930), 230.]

Eleven months later, Hamilton would also describe an altogether different kind of pirate standard being flown by another rover, when he recorded the narrow escape of a little British sloop chased through the shoal waters of St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands by a pirate ship of 18 or 20 guns, which had fired three times at its intended victim: 'the first under British colors, which he [the pirate captain] lowered, and then hoisted a white ensign with the figure of a dead man spread on it.' [Footnote 15: Calendar of State Papers, Colonial: America and West Indies, vol. 30 (London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1930), 148.]" (Marley, p. 182)

Thus much for David Marley and his book.

[Swashbuckler 1700]

Eleven months later, Hamilton would also describe an altogether different kind of pirate standard being flown by another rover, when he recorded the narrow escape of a little British sloop chased through the shoal waters of St. Thomas in the Virgin Islands by a pirate ship of 18 or 20 guns, which had fired three times at its intended victim: 'the first under British colors, which he [the pirate captain] lowered, and then hoisted a white ensign with the figure of a dead man spread on it.' [Footnote 15: Calendar of State Papers, Colonial: America and West Indies, vol. 30 (London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1930), 148.]" (Marley, p. 182)

Just something: Woodard says that that was La Buse's flag and he has the same description by Hamilton. I think there are pretty good reasons to believe that that was La Buse active there.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Swashbuckler 1700

[Daniel]

I wonder if "the figure of a dead man" means a skeleton. If it was just a dead man with flesh still on him, how could you tell at a glace that he was dead?

[Mission]

I wondered at first, but you don't find many period images of corpses that are easily discerned as being such. They often look like people who are asleep. (Hogarth's Reward of Cruelty image comes to mind...I first thought it was an actual surgery instead of a corpse in the image until I focused on what they were doing to the guy on the table.)

So I would says he meant a skeleton.

[Mission]

They had a discussion going over at the Authentic Pirate Living History group on Facebook concerning the origin of the term Jolly Roger that produced some information that was too good not to share for those who don't follow the group. (This information is via our own Foxe with David Fictum (Brit.Privateer) providing information and commentary to the mix. I will link inline to their actual FB posts for reference.)

It started when Foxe said he had information from period, which I asked him about.

Ed responded:

"I'm sure I've posted the jolly roger thing before. There's a newspaper printed in 1719 containing an article about Davis' company, in which their black flag is called "Johnny Rogers". The same article mentions the pirates using "Johnny Rogers" as a colloquial nickname for Woodes Rogers, governor of the Bahamas. Incidentally, it is also the earliest reference to the term for the flag in print - five years earlier than the OED's current oldest version (which I gave them)."

David found the actual article, which he quoted:

"From the Weekly Packet, December 5, 1719 - December 12, 1719; Issue 388.
After taking and destroying some vessels of the Whydah coast in Africa, the Davis gang said, "...for they wanted Men and large Ships, to be stronger, to go on the Coast of Brazil, and then to the South Sea; they said they would do all the Mischief they could, for they should have another Pardon sent to call them in, and then they would go into Providence, to their old Friend Johnny Rogers; and lay down their Standard, which they hoisted at Main-topmast-head, with a Gun and Sword, which they call'd Johnny Rogers, and when all was spent, take it up and begin again; they said they knew of 8 or 10 Sail more, besides themselves, that were out upon the same Account, and they reckon'd among their Ships to have above 500 Men, and increasing.

After reading that - could someone explain what they are trying to say? Because initially it reads like they call "the Gun and Sword" the Johnny Rodgers. They definitely didn't punctuate and structure written sentences like we do today."

Ed commented:
"The punctuation is difficult: I take this to mean that Davis' flag featured a gun and a sword, and was called Johnny Rogers. It could also mean that the flag, gun, and sword were separate items, but in that case the next part should run "...spent, take *them* up and begin again", not *it*, and the sword would be called "Johnny Rogers" which doesn't seem as likely as the flag having the name."

At first I thought it was all just sort of interesting and not of much consequence. (Note that the link between Davis' crew's 'Johnny Rogers' and 'Jolly Roger' looks likely, but cannot be proven by this alone.)

But thinking more on it, I agreed with David's assessment (particularly the second point):

"I would put why this is important in two ways.

One, it dispels a pirate myth, nay, one of those "pirate facts" that floats around so long it becomes "fact". The origins of a pirate flag name "Jolly Roger" has been pretty dominated by what amounts to unsupported conjecture. For the first time, there is actually a document from the period that provides a potential explanation, which is miles ahead of conjecture without documents to back it up. People who study history often try to dispel myths for the documented history.

Two, knowing about the origins of the name of the flag helps us understand the society/culture pirates developed. Flags are a significant symbol to pirates considering their use (see my reddit post on flags that starts this thread). Knowing about the origins of that flags given nickname is a significant insight into a pirate's world view. In this case, they used their flag to make reference to an authority figure in a way that isn't necessarily flattering. Doesn't that seem significant?"

[Daniel]

Wow. Very interesting.

Oddly, Wikipedia's Jolly Roger page used to include a theory that Woodes Rogers's name birthed the flag's name. But there was no supporting reference, and I zapped it after it had hung around unsupported for a couple of years. If I could verify that Weekly Packet reference, I would put it back in. Is the Weekly Packet published in a bound volume somewhere? Or in an archive?

[Fox]

There's a copy of that issue of the Weekly Packet in the Burney Collection at the British Museum. If it helps, I can confirm that it says what the quote above says.

[Brit.Privateer]

Wow. Very interesting.

Oddly, Wikipedia's Jolly Roger page used to include a theory that Woodes Rogers's name birthed the flag's name. But there was no supporting reference, and I zapped it after it had hung around unsupported for a couple of years. If I could verify that Weekly Packet reference, I would put it back in. Is the Weekly Packet published in a bound volume somewhere? Or in an archive?

If you are a college student/professor/associate at a institute that invests in good history databases, there's a good chance that you have access to a British Newspaper database that covers papers from 1600-1900. That's where I got the newspaper account and transcribed it myself for that facebook post linked by Mission.

['Beer Belly' Bellamy]

A similar origin is given for the word "freebooter," coming from a Dutch word for "plunderer."

In German the term "Freibeuter" means literally 'free to capture' = somebody is allowed (by the authorities) to capture things. So the best content-related translation into english would be Privateer. A "Freibeuter" is not a pirate!

As the Dutch language is a German dialect the Dutch term "vrijbuiter" cames from "Freibeuter". So the english term "freebooter" is not a far to off translation, althoug I would translate it into "freelooter" = somebody who is allowed (by the authorities) to loot things!

[Fox]

Here's the last bit from David Marley's somewhat disappointingly footnoted book Daily Life of Pirates ...

"Although the colorful expression 'skull-and-crossbones' did not enter into common usage in the English language until much later on, a report submitted to London from Governor Walter Hamilton of the Antillean Island of Antigua on December 14, 1716 (O.S.) [Er, Marley explains somewhat sniffily that this means Old Style dates in the beginning of his book. This would take to long to explain, but if you're curious, look here.] described a recent spate of attacks perpetrated in those waters by Sam Bellamy - and specifically mentioned how his pirate sloop Mary Anne had run down a hapless pair of trading vessels near the Dutch island of Sabá while flying a large black flag emplazoned with 'a Deaths Head and Bones a-cross.' [Footnote 14: Calendar of State Papers, Colonial: America and West Indies, vol. 29 (London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1930), 230.]

Rather behind the times, I just went in search of that reference. There are other references to Bellamy flying a skull and cross bones (the trial of the survivors of the Whydah, for example), but I'm chasing down all the odd flag references at the moment.

The CSPC, vol. 29, p.230 is indeed a letter from Hamilton dated Dec. 14 1716, and it does mention attacks by Bellamy in the Mary-Anne, but it does NOT mention Bellamy's flag.

[Red John]

Interesting flag - Well past the GAoP (well, defining GAoP is another subject, but at 1790 I don't think there's much argument it's a late-period flag, post GAoP) but still a nice flag and one of the few almost-GAoP flags other than the one Pat Croce has, and a nice contrast to the black and white ones we almost always see.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2074868/Rare-red-Jolly-Roger-pirate-flag-captured-battle-north-Africa-230-years-ago-goes-display-time.html

The article repeats certain inaccuracies we often hear, but it does show the flag and gives a couple notes on where it came from.

Aye,

John