View Full Version : To what extent is the pirate myth of popular culture based on reality?


Darth_Pugwash
May 05, 2006, 03:19 AM
This is my A-level history coursework. I'm not looking for feedback (its already been submitted), I'm just posting it as an article. But be warned, its long!

I hope you like it. :)

And many thanks to David Cordingly's excellent book "Under The Black Flag: The Romance and Reality of Life Among the Pirates" too!

---------------------------------------------------
To what extent is the pirate myth of popular culture based upon reality?

Over the years pirates have been seen as romantic and dashing figures, prowling the Spanish Main, hiding on tropical islands and hunting for lost treasure. Everyone knows, or thinks that they know, exactly what a pirate looks and sounds like – he wears an eye patch, brightly coloured, mismatched clothes, and carries a cutlass. He talks with a heavy accent and says ‘Arr’ a lot. He has a parrot on his shoulder, and maybe he has a wooden leg, or a hook for a hand. He is a daring hero, who has thrown of the shackles of society and he lives free on the waves of the sea, plundering mountains of Spanish gold and treasure.

http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/3826/pirate6xe.png (http://imageshack.us)

This is the pirate of popular culture, whose legend has been built up by three centuries of stories, plays and films. He is made up of some truth, some half-truth and some downright making things up. In some ways, he is very much like the buccaneers of history, and in others he is nothing like them.

The single most influential thing that has influenced how we see pirates today is the book Treasure Island, which was written by Robert Louis Stevenson and first published in 1883. It has forever made pirates associated with buried treasure, tropical islands and one-legged seamen with parrots on their shoulder. The idea of buried treasure is Treasure Islands most famous, and most fictional, additions to the pirate myth. Pirates never buried their gold – they spent it on drink, gambling and women at the nearest friendly port. The treasure map and the buried gold were entirely made up by Stevenson for purposes of the story. Because of the huge popularity of Treasure Island though, the map to buried treasure has become one of the most familiar pirate props.

There is only one historical example of a pirate burying his treasure (and perhaps this is what gave Stevenson the idea). The pirate Captain William Kidd, who was executed by the British in 1701, was rumoured to have buried the gold that he plundered shortly before he was put on trial. Due to the high-profile nature of Kidd’s trial, many treasure-hunts took place, to be disappointed every time, and it is likely that the buried treasure was nothing more than a rumour. Apart from this, there are almost no examples of a pirate burying treasure at all.

Another great contribution of Treasure Island to the pirate genre is the one legged man, who has a wooden leg – the sea cook Long John Silver. This is not fictional, as it was common for sailors of the time to sustain such injuries during battle. In many cases, if their was no surgeon on board, the ships carpenter might have taken over the role, as in the case of William Philips, an 18th century sailor who had his right leg amputated aboard a ship. According to one observer the carpenter went to work “as though he were cutting a deal board in two”. However, in most cases crutches were used instead of wooden legs. It is also clear that Stevenson knew what he was doing when he cast Long John as a sea-cook, as it was standard practise aboard sailing vessels that the ships cook be chosen from disabled seamen who could not perform any other task.

Another memorable feature of Treasure Island is Long John’s parrot, Captain Flint. This started a long association of pirates and parrots which can still be seen today. It is also not fictional. Sailors would often bring parrots or occasionally monkeys back with them from the Caribbean as souvenirs of their travels. They could also be sold for a high price as they were very rare and highly valued in Europe at the time. They were also sometimes used to bribe governors or other officials.

Another book which has had a considerable influence on the pirate legend is Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie. It was originally a play first performed in 1904 but later became a book, published in 1911. Its two outstanding contributions to the pirate of popular culture are the hook-hand, and the punishment of walking the plank, both of which are completely fictional. They have both however, become key elements of today’s popular image of the pirate. The metal hook in place of a hand was made famous by Captain Hook, Peter Pan’s nemesis, and Captain Hook was going to dispose of Peter and his group by forcing them to walk of a plank that extended over the side of his ship. Actual pirate punishments, such as keel-hauling, which is often referred to but almost never carried out by the stereotypical pirate, were far more brutal. When a sailor was keel-hauled, he was tied to a rope which ran underneath the ship from front to back or side to side, and dragged under the hull, often two or three times. This was generally a death-sentence, though occasionally a man would survive. Peter Pan, along with The Pirates of Penzance, is also one of the more famous works that contributed to the view that pirates are sometimes seen from today, which is as lovable buffoons rather than criminals, which is how they were viewed during their ‘time in the sun’.

One of the most striking and key differences between the Caribbean pirates of history and those seen in many films, for example the recent Disney film Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, is the size of the ships that they used. The popular film pirate is most often seen sailing in huge ships, galleons and ships-of-the-line, of the type that would have been used by the Navies of powerful European countries. In reality pirates preferred small, fast ships, that could appear and escape again very quickly, and were easy to maintain. The most common type of ship used by pirates in the Golden Age of Piracy was the sloop, a small and fast ship, with either one or two masts. Sloops usually measured 60-70 feet long, around 15-20 feet wide, and weighed up to 80 tons. Between 1710 and 1730 55% of pirate attacks were made in sloops and 45% were made in ‘ships’ – which in the 1800s was a precise term for any sailing vessel with three masts and square-rigged sails, larger than a sloop and usually weighing 100-200 tons. Most warships at the time were ‘ships’ however the ships used by pirates were more oftenly stolen and re-fitted merchant vessels rather than captured Navy ones.

Because of the size of the ships that they used, most pirates were overmatched against even smaller sized naval ships. A sixth rate ship of the Royal Navy, the smallest rated vessels in the Navy, would have up to 30 guns and 200 men, comparable to a large pirate ship. As a result of this, the usual prey of the pirate was merchant ships (which would often run with very small crews to save on wages) rather than spectacular battles with military vessels. When a military vessel did arrive, a pirate ship would usually turn away and attempt to out-run it or hide in shallow waters where more heavily armed ships could not sail. There were obviously some exceptions to this, in the cases of famous pirates such as Francis Drake or Henry Morgan. However, despite this, when we think of pirates, we think of massive Spanish Galleons and epic battles at sea, when clearly this was not the case. However the Hollywood swash-buckling movies of he 1930s and 1940s, such as The Black Pirate or Captain Blood starring Errol Flynn, have launched the current vision of the massive pirate ship that has become prevalent today

Contrary to what we have seen in many Hollywood films, the Captain of a pirate ship usually did not have complete command. The Captain was elected by the crew and could be deposed, sometimes violently, at any time. For example Bart Roberts was elected to be captain after the crew of a trading ship successfully mutinied. Unlike vessels in the various Navies of the time, the crew usually played a large part in deciding the ships next course of action. The exceptions to this came when a particularly well known pirate, such as Henry Morgan, was in command, due to the respect and fame that they had.

Indeed, many pirate crews operated by a surprisingly concise set of rules, and many pirate ships were run by a limited form of democracy. This ‘pirates code’ was designed to prevent arguments over the division of plunder, discipline and how duties were allocated among the crew. The charter of rules that was used by Bart Roberts has survived in full to today, and it even includes a form of insurance against injury. It reads: “Every man who shall become a cripple or lose a limb in the service shall have eighth hundred pieces of eight from the common stock, and for less hurts proportionately”. This particular aspect of piracy, although it seems more the stuff of chivalry than piracy, has only very rarely surfaced in popular culture. The film ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ is the best example, which mentions the ‘pirates code’ several times. However it is clear where the writers of the movie got the idea from.

Despite this however, pirates remained a very cruel lot, who lived a harsh life. The pirate of popular culture, with his treasure-chests full of gold doubloons, is often imagined retiring from the sea to some tropical island, to live off his hordes of gold. This particular romantic image is very far removed from reality – almost all pirates did not live long enough to retire, and still fewer had enough money to live off of. Even famous pirates such as Blackbeard, Bart Roberts, Captain Kidd, and ‘Calico’ Jack Rackham were killed or executed before they could even think about retirement. However, there are exceptions, for example Henry Morgan, who, after a greatly successful career, retired to Jamaica in 1674 to spend the rest of his days enjoying his wealth and fame – he is perhaps the only pirate (or privateer) to truly live the dream that seems so common when we imagine laughing captains such as Long John Silver.

The stereotypical pirate that we imagine today is almost always white, however historically this was not the case. A considerable number of black men served aboard pirate vessels, sometimes as members of the crew, however more oftenly they were treated as slaves. A man who was on board a ship attacked by Bart Roberts reported that up to 100 of his 400 strong crew were black. However in a lot of cases blacks were simply treated as a commodity to be bought and sold. Female pirates would be completely unheard of if it were not for the unique story of Anne Bonny and Mary Read. When was the last time that you saw a female pirate in a popular pirate story? It is unlikely that you thought of one, because they are just as rare in our pirate-based entertainment as they were in reality, and this is historically correct. Many pirate movies though, for example the Pirates of the Carribean, do star females in action-orientated roles, though they may not appear as actual pirates. Historically cases such as this would be rare to say the least, due to attitudes towards women at the time. One similarity between the imaginary pirate and the real pirate, which may well be simple co-incidence, is their nationality – during the Golden Age of Piracy over 50% of pirates were British, and many of them had seen service in the Royal Navy.

The distinctive costume and appearance of the pirate is surprisingly close to reality. Pirate crewmen would wear short jackets, with a checkered shirt and long trousers. They would also wear bandanas to keep sweat off their face. Pirate captains and other higher-ranking buccaneers would sometimes be seen wearing brightly coloured and fashionable clothes captured from aristocrats, though often these would quickly become worn out and scruffy-looking from their use on a ship. The pirate Bart Roberts became famous for the way he dressed, and would not look out of place on stage or in a pantomime. When he was killed in 1722 he was reportedly wearing “a rich crimson damask waistcoat and breeches, a red feather in his hat, and a gold chain round his neck, with a diamond cross hanging to it”.

The fearsome appearance of Blackbeard, perhaps the most famous real pirate, is also, surprisingly, based in reality. Lieutenant Maynard, who killed Blackbeard aboard his ship (a sloop) in 1718, said “he went by the name of Blackbeard, because he let his beard grow, and tied it up in black ribbons”, and Henry Bostock, whose ship was attacked by Blackbeard in 1717 described him as “a giant man with a very black beard which he wore very long”. There are also reports of him lighting slow-burning matches and hiding them under his hat or in his beard, before he went into battle, to make himself seem even more fearsome.

There is even a historical precedent for eye patches. On board sailing ships, especially in the Caribbean, the contrast in the amount of light above and below deck was very sharp, and it could take the eye several minutes to adjust when moving from the deck to below deck. To resolve this problem many sailors would cover one eye while above deck, so that when they went below deck that eye was already adjusted to low light conditions. They would switch the patch from one eye to the other depending on where they were, so they would not have to be temporarily blinded when moving between decks.

The ear-rings that can be seen on many film pirates today also is historical – many sailors in the 17th and 18th centuries believed that wearing a gold ear-ring could stop you from getting sea-sick.

The Jolly Roger, the skull-and-cross-bones flag often seen in pirate films also has its roots in reality. However, unlike what we have seen in many pirate films and books, historically there was not one consistent Jolly Roger, but hundreds. The term Jolly Roger came into use in the 18th century by English sailors referring to pirate flags, however when they said Jolly Roger, they were referring to any flag flown by a pirate vessel, not just the skull and crossbones design that has become dominant today. Many pirate vessels had their own version of the Jolly Roger. The only consistent thing was that they were usually coloured either black or red, and had some sort of fearsome symbol on them, such a skull, skeleton or a sword.

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/5586/jrblackbeard4wf.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/6333/jrengland4qr.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/1979/jrmoody8zs.gif (http://imageshack.us)

The over the top pirate accent which is now connected to pirates is not completely a fabrication either – it is thought to be a heavily exaggerated version of the West Country English accent that many British sailors of the time picked up in ports such as Plymouth. In this case though, the stereotypical pirate of popular culture is only very distantly related to his historical counterpart. This theory however is suspicious at best – why after all do regular British sailors not have the pirate accent too? It is also hard to believe that the accent would become so dominant when sailors could come from anywhere in Europe or the Caribbean, however there are noticeable similarities, for example the slightly exaggerated ‘arr’ sound.

Today, when we think of a pirate, we think of tropical islands, and the Spanish Main, and we tend to forget that pirates operated as far back as the time of the Roman Empire, and as far away as the South China Sea (especially the Strait of Malacca), today. While it is true that the Golden Age of Piracy took place in the Caribbean, there have been pirates all over the world, and there are still pirates on the seas today. In 2003, according to the International Maritime Bureau, there were over 200 pirate attacks which resulted in 16 deaths and over 50 injuries. However, these have become eclipsed by the Caribbean buccaneer of the 18th century, who has emerged as the dominant face of piracy in today’s society.

The image of the pirate that has become so dominant in popular culture today is actually surprisingly close to the historical pirates that roamed the Caribbean in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. From the flags to the peg-legs and even the eye-patches, there are a lot of similarities however there are also a wide range of exaggerations, glamorisations and misconceptions that have arisen from three hundred years of stories, plays, books, films and other forms of entertainment – the maps to buried treasure, and walking the plank, for example. These things have come together to form the modern image of a pirate and sometimes it is hard to tell what is true to life and what isn’t, so that the real pirates have become ‘lost in the noise’ to a certain extent.

Rambuchan
May 05, 2006, 04:41 AM
Nicely written article there. Good job and thanks for posting it :goodjob:

I think Pirates are fascinating and their significance both in history and today is largely overlooked. This comes in part from the stereotypes mentioned above, for their seeming mythic, comic qualities distract from the fact Pirates were very real and were significant political tools in virtually all of the Western European nations' empire building efforts. And those nations were not alone in using privateers of all walks.

What's even more interesting, at least to me, is that Pirates play a big part in the modern global economy in much the same way as they did say 500 years ago. I'm talking about privatisation, media piracy and a number of other private enterprises and private armies. These guys operate on the periphery, on the fringe and they push social, commercial and technical developments onwards significantly.

Adler17
May 05, 2006, 07:09 AM
Good article.

Adler

mrtn
May 05, 2006, 08:24 AM
Interesting, thank you.

:)

Kyriakos
May 05, 2006, 02:35 PM
Nice article; i didnt know that the pirate image has been influenced by Peter Pan, and i haven't read treasure island :)
I remeber watching the movie adaptation of Peter Pan when it was released, more than ten years ago (infact closer to thirteen) :)

Dreadnought
May 05, 2006, 02:47 PM
I really liked the article! Thanks! :)

Thorgalaeg
May 05, 2006, 07:47 PM
Good article, dont forget Barbery pirates like Barbarossa, the most powerful pirates, who even gained control over large portions of Norh Africa.

Plotinus
May 06, 2006, 05:19 AM
Very good. With regard to the accent, it's worth pointing out that the Cornish have always been associated with the sea, and I should think that a very disproportionate number of sailors in the eighteenth century were indeed from Cornwall or had spent time there. Indeed, the Cornish accent has often been stereotypically associated with maritime activities in general, not just piracy. I have a good friend who is a Cornish sailor and he sounds exactly like a pirate...

Rambuchan
May 06, 2006, 06:15 AM
Yeah true. I have quite a few Pirate friends and they all sound like west country farmers. :ack:

Darth_Pugwash
May 06, 2006, 07:47 AM
Quite afew pirate friends...:hmm:

Something your not telling us Ram, you scurvy old sea dog you! ;)

@your first comment: you are right IIRC pirates and privateers were employed by alot of countries to raid their rivals shipping without implicating themselves or sparking a war.

@Thorgalaeg: Indeed I probably should have mentioned the pirates of the barbary coast too.

Darth_Pugwash
May 06, 2006, 07:51 AM
Thanks for the comments folks. :)

Mirc
May 06, 2006, 08:09 AM
Nice article!

Richard Cribb
May 06, 2006, 11:55 AM
Good, nicely outlined and informative article, but I would have liked to see more social aspects considered. For instance, during the Golden Age of Piracy, why did people embark on such a "career"?
I can recommend the works of Marcus Rediker:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=4880

http://www.socialistunitynetwork.co.uk/counter/pirates.htm

7ronin
May 07, 2006, 08:42 PM
Nicely done article. :goodjob: Don't forget that one man's pirate may be another man's "freedom fighter." ;) I believe that Elizabeth I licensed her "Sea Dogs" to attack Spanish shipping. And even Captain Kidd carried out his activities lawfully. It is probable that he was hanged for piracy on trumped up charges and tampered/withheld evidence.

For those of you who have not read Stevenson's Treasure Island, do so; it is one of the great adventure tales of all times. Disney's faithful film version with the great Robert Newton as Long John is also unforgettable.

Darth_Pugwash
May 08, 2006, 05:03 AM
@lucea: just starting to stray slightly from the main topic with that but indeed it would have been a good addition.

I also reccomend Treasure Island to anyone - it is a good adventure story, short and easy to read too. :goodjob:

The film version that you mentioned 7ronin was on TV yesterday, first time I've seen it, it is indeed very good and surprisingly faithful, although I imagined Jim a couple years older.

brachy-pride
May 08, 2006, 07:43 PM
I dont think in Spain or the caribean cities pirates are seen in a positive light like in the USA or england.
I hate to use the T word, but they were close to being terrorists.

7ronin
May 13, 2006, 05:33 PM
I dont think in Spain or the caribean cities pirates are seen in a positive light like in the USA or england.
I hate to use the T word, but they were close to being terrorists.

I don't think that we regard pirates necessarily in a positive light. It has more to do with the love of adventure and romanticism. And of course, on another level, the fearsome pirate is akin to the bogeyman.

I quite agree that some forms of piracy are seen negatively by some peoples. But as I think I mentioned earlier, the Seadogs were heroes in England and villains in Spain.

If you get around to reading Treasure Island, make sure you get one of the editions with the wonderful illustrations by N.C. Wyeth (Andrew's father).

Darth, my apologies if I've digressed too much.

Darth_Pugwash
May 14, 2006, 06:46 AM
No problemo 7ronin, you've not digressed too much.

But yes it makes sense that the Spanish would have more of a grudge against pirates than say the British, becuase as the super-power of the carribean, Spain was the main target for pirate attacks.

And I guess the propaganda did the rest. :D

Yeeek
May 14, 2006, 05:23 PM
I dont think in Spain or the caribean cities pirates are seen in a positive light like in the USA or england.
I hate to use the T word, but they were close to being terrorists.

You should read about Robert Surcouf, well known french corsair. Privateer you say? English or Spanish would call him a pirate, or a criminal.

Thorgalaeg
May 15, 2006, 11:49 AM
It is that they were. Dont lose the perspective. In despite of the myth and the propaganda, pirates and privateers were not more than criminals, the first terrorist, worse than current terrorist indeed since a terrorist massacres civils and such because an ideal at least, while pirates did it mostly for money.

Keshik
May 15, 2006, 11:55 AM
Good Aaaaaarrticle.

Dell19
May 15, 2006, 03:54 PM
Thats terrible :p

Darth_Pugwash
May 15, 2006, 04:29 PM
Indeed, you might even say that its arrrrrrrrful (awful)!

Yeeek
May 16, 2006, 01:36 AM
It is that they were. Dont lose the perspective. In despite of the myth and the propaganda, pirates and privateers were not more than criminals, the first terrorist, worse than current terrorist indeed since a terrorist massacres civils and such because an ideal at least, while pirates did it mostly for money.

I don't like to put privateers and pirates in the same bag. Pirates are in my mind criminals while privateers were basically mercenaries. I know the difference is small but its still there.

If you look at Robert Surcouf's bio he was definitly a person with an idea. Pride and wealth was not his only interests.

Plotinus
May 16, 2006, 04:30 AM
Although I'm not sure why having an ideal or a principle makes someone better than someone who's just in it for the money. Personally I'd think that a pirate who robs or kills for financial gain is preferable to a terrorist who kills out of fidelity to some "principle", because whilst both are bad, the pirate is at least sane.

Thorgalaeg
May 16, 2006, 07:07 AM
You can ask a judge, any sane criminal gets worse condemns what a crazy one. :p

Well i dont know what is worse indeed, it is a matter of opinion. Idealists at least think that they are doing "good" (allthough many times that results in more victims) while regular criminals simply dont care.

Yeeek
May 16, 2006, 08:41 AM
Read a book about Surcouf :) The kind of privateers i was refering to were not doing it for their own agenda, in Surcouf's case we are talking about France's interest at the time.

Plotinus
May 16, 2006, 09:46 AM
Well, doing something in the interest of a country is definitely lower down the scale of morality and general comprehensibility than doing something for the sake of money or pretty much anything else, really. A "country" is just an abstraction. From that point of view, I wouldn't see much difference between a pirate working as a privateer and one working simply as a thief.

Kosez
May 20, 2006, 07:25 AM
First of all, grat article. I only wish it is not last of that kind. I've got tired of all those which is the best... and name the worst... threads.

About morality and pirats.
Morality is in the eye of one who judges it, and is thus very relative. I wouldn't say it is immoral to convert to piracy in order to survive, I also have doubts about immorality of robing treasure ships full of gold stolen in cruel and immoral ways from rightful proprietors (i.e. South American Indians), even if this roberry was not commited in order to secure one's survival.

I imagine majority of men that went for piracy did it because they wanted to get rich in a fast and easy way. But who could blame them, the whole western culture is based on our desire to get rich.

Is it more immoral to attack unprotected cargo ship than to rainsack colonies or villages, as European soldiers did. We also should not forget, pirates and navies sometimes cooperated quite well. England had no peritcular interest in fighting the pirates in 16th and early 17th century, they became a problem only when England also aquired some colonies in New World and started a wide scale trade with those colonies.

As someone said earlier, one's pirate is another's fighter for freedom, it goes the same for a lot of things, including terrorism. This is history for, so we can learn that where the smoke is there is also a fire.

Have a nice weekend.

P.S.: I have a feeling there are loads of misspellings in my post. Sorry for it.

Thorgalaeg
May 20, 2006, 10:04 AM
About morality and pirats.
Morality is in the eye of one who judges it, and is thus very relative. I wouldn't say it is immoral to convert to piracy in order to survive, I also have doubts about immorality of robing treasure ships full of gold stolen in cruel and immoral ways from rightful proprietors (i.e. South American Indians), even if this roberry was not commited in order to secure one's survival.
This is a common Hollywoodiense myth. As the article says, Pirates didnt attack big galeons loaded with gold and such from his righteous proprietors. Galeons (at least the spanish ones) loaded with gold and silver (silver mostly) extracted from Peru and New Spain mines, traveled inside a large convoy called "la flota de las indias" with heavy escort and were well beyond the possibilities of the pirates. This fleet traveled twice nearly every year along more than 200 years. IIRC in all this time it was attacked succesfully only in an ocassion by Drake, when coming back after attacking Cadiz he found accidentally the fleet berthed in Vigo. I dont know as it was in other countries cases but surely it was similar.

Pirates attacked common civilians merchants. To justify this since a moral POW is equivalent to justify the Twin Towers attacks or some street robbery in New York because North America was stolen of the Indians.

shortguy
May 20, 2006, 10:42 AM
Piet Heyn also successfully attacked the treasure fleet in 1627-ish.

EDIT: 1628.

Kosez
May 21, 2006, 04:42 AM
This is a common Hollywoodiense myth. As the article says, Pirates didnt attack big galeons loaded with gold and such from his righteous proprietors. Galeons (at least the spanish ones) loaded with gold and silver (silver mostly) extracted from Peru and New Spain mines, traveled inside a large convoy called "la flota de las indias" with heavy escort and were well beyond the possibilities of the pirates. This fleet traveled twice nearly every year along more than 200 years. IIRC in all this time it was attacked succesfully only in an ocassion by Drake, when coming back after attacking Cadiz he found accidentally the fleet berthed in Vigo. I dont know as it was in other countries cases but surely it was similar.

Pirates attacked common civilians merchants. To justify this since a moral POW is equivalent to justify the Twin Towers attacks or some street robbery in New York because North America was stolen of the Indians.

I understand what you wan't to say, and I agree to some extent.
I know about treasure fleets and I also know who was the main pray for pirates, but that was not my point.
All I wanted to say, there are allways two sides of a medal, and every person sits on both sides. Conquistadors were robbing Indians, when they grew old they turned into merchants, and were robbed by pirates.
There is no such thing as absolute good or absolute evil, it is just another Hollywood myth;)

A more modern example: pirates of Indian ocean, that are still attacking ships today (actually their numbers have been growing). From perspective of a sailors and owners of ships they are evil. But from perspective of those pirates, you will see that they are just common people trying to survive this crazy times, they countries are rich but 90% of people are extremely poor, and no matter what you do, you never get a break. So I can understand why they turned to piracy. And I don't think it is so very immoral to steal a ship's cargo, although I think murdering people on ships cannot be justified no matter what.

Basically, I want to point out, that we judge pirates, terrorists, thiefs, etc..., from a black&white perspective, but we do not want to contemplate upon reasons that forced them into doing it. Surely a life of a pirate or a terrorist is not so attractive that people would do it just because it's fun. Don't you think so?

7ronin
May 23, 2006, 04:04 AM
ISurely a life of a pirate or a terrorist is not so attractive that people would do it just because it's fun. Don't you think so?

"A pirate's life is not an easy one," W.S. Gilbert from the Pirates of Penzance.