Caribbean Pirates: Heroes or Villains?
The Economic and Social Impact of Widespread Piracy
Dec 3, 2008
Pirates have always been significant members of our cultural consciousness – even before the days of swashbuckling Errol Flynn and dashing Johnny Depp, we had Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island to dazzle us with tales of buried treasure and dastardly villains. But lately, many historians, popular and otherwise, have been attempting to drive a point home, to plow these admittedly childish caricatures under with descriptions of violent and cruel corsairs on the high seas. The authorities, be they historical or political, remind the people whenever pirates become prominent in popular media, that these were in fact bad men. But is that the end of it? Is there more to be unraveled in this historical puzzle?
Pirates and History
The truth is, as is often the case, more interesting than any of the many fictions. It is difficult to cast judgment on pirates as a whole, because in general, they were just sailors and soldiers who changed professions. The law was fuzzy on the subject of piracy, so a completely legitimate privateer or merchant vessel might find themselves labeled pirate without any piratical action on their part. No doubt, many of these sea-going marauders were guilty as could be, but their actions as a whole suggest that they still thought of themselves as legitimate sailors. And apparently, so did many others.
Pirates in the Marketplace
What is often left out of both the histories and the stories is the fact that pirates carried out trade with the young American colonies on a fairly regular basis. Rhode Island harbored well known pirates during the late 17th and early 18th centuries, choosing to look the other way and benefit from their suspicious cargo. The governor and deputy governor frequently issued full commissions to crews that they knew full well would turn to piracy. These pirates brought luxuries and wealth to the colonies that the strict English trade regulations denied them, and were celebrated for doing so – sometimes they were even welcomed into the homes of governors and officials as honored guests. The Earl of Bellomont, tasked with removing the plague of piracy from Virginia’s shores, was strongly disliked by those who believed that removing the pirates would ruin the town.
Colonial Ambitions, Mercantilism, and European Policy
The penalties for trading and harboring pirates could be harsh, and many colonial officials were removed from their posts for turning a blind eye to the shady characters who came to port bearing gold, silk, ivory, silver and other treasures. So why did they, and their citizens, allow it?
There are many answers to that question. The mercantilist economic system had the effect of stifling colonial growth by strictly regulating what went in and out of the Atlantic colonies. As the struggling, desperate colonies of the early 17th century were replaced with wealthy, commercially successful outposts, these restrictions became a noose. Pirates offered a way to receive restricted and luxury goods without a tariff or a markup and often at reduced prices – due, of course, to the stolen nature of the goods. What’s more, the difference between a pirate crew and a merchant crew was rarely obvious – both crews were mostly British citizens or American colonists, and while there were things that distinguished them, there was nothing foreign or offensive about the pirates who came to colonial shores.
The truth is that the piracy question is a complicated one, and while it is easy to paint colorful pictures of or condemn these pirates outright, the reality is that the difference between a legitimate privateer and a dastardly pirate was often just a flag and a letter signed by the governor.
 |
 |
 |
