parsifal
Colonel
So,on that basis, I take it you are not a fan of John Paul Jones or Francis Drake. Both these guys were Privateers, state sponsored pirates
Pirates of the.....
- Thread starter Lucky13
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
So,on that basis, I take it you are not a fan of John Paul Jones or Francis Drake. Both these guys were Privateers, state sponsored pirates
Maestro
Master Sergeant
May be, but chivalry is what gave birth to the Geneva Convention. Ever heard of Joan of Arc ordering her troops to NOT attack civillians ? That fact is recognized (at least by the French) as the starting point of what would become, a few centuries later, the Geneva Convention.
Also, chivalry did exist in the Middle Age. You know how Richard Lionheart died ? He was in reconnaissance near an enemy castle (in Chalus-Chabrol) and an arrow hit him in the shoulder (near its junction with the neck).
Quote from Wikipedia :
However...
So chivalry did exist... Just not as much as it is believed today.
Colin1
Senior Master Sergeant
You presume wrongly - Robert Louis Stevenson
Unlucky you, I never got that deep as a kid, having fun was more important and being a pirate looked like fun.
Do Westerns come under your scrutiny too? What we did to the red man was unspeakable. Don't tell me, you never dressed up as a cowboy when you were a kid...
No?
What else does it say on your sandwich board?
Got a point there...
If we can not enjoy Pirate entertainment because they were not nice guys, then how can we enjoy westerns...????
If we can not enjoy Pirate entertainment because they were not nice guys, then how can we enjoy westerns...????
vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I'll throw this one out. How different are priates then the commcerce raiders used in WW1 2?
- Thread starter
- #26
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
More modern and better weapons? 
Colin1
Senior Master Sergeant
I don't think there's much of a comparison is there?
Merchant Marine and liners fitted for armament and nuisance-raiding around the coastal waters or shipping lanes of a given country, hoping to interrupt their resupply. Regardless of its success as a strategy, it was part of a military plan, however indirectly.
Pirates on the other hand were invariably self-serving and likely wouldn't hesitate to attack a vessel of a given country even if the pirates own complement was made up of mainly that country's nationality.
Gains for the commerce raiders would be the indirect strategic interruption of enemy resupply, gains for the pirates would be direct material wealth in the form of whatever their victims happened to be carrying.
The primary goal of the commerce raiders could be construed as being to sink their victims as quickly as possible whereas it would not be in the pirates interest to achieve the same end.
A reasoned guess - sound about right?
Last edited:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
A person could also look at the WWI/WWII commerce raiders compared to modern day pirates.
There is no comparison, pirates are just that, no matter how you look at it.
There is no comparison, pirates are just that, no matter how you look at it.
parsifal
Colonel
I think the national expectations have changed about what is piracy and what is legitimate military action. Even in the 16th century it was blurred. Some members of the regular navy engaged in legitmate, state sponsored acts of terror, these were called privateers. Others (and often these same privateers) would engage in outright piracy, for personal gain, and no state related connection whatsover.
As nations have risen to control the seas, they have endeavoured to demonise piracy on the seas. This is because piracy has huge effects on commerce and trade, therefore, the benefit given to the dominant seapower is diminished by the nation undertaking the guere de course campaign.
In the 16th century, pirates were not idolized, but they often served a useful military purpose. As time went by these audacious men were idolized and romanticised. We do the same with the exploits of the WWI/II raiders. They were courageous men, and we give them credit, but they were still basically state sponsored pirates.
I draw the line with the Somaliu pirates of today, though to their own people, I am sure they are viewed as ruguish heroes
As nations have risen to control the seas, they have endeavoured to demonise piracy on the seas. This is because piracy has huge effects on commerce and trade, therefore, the benefit given to the dominant seapower is diminished by the nation undertaking the guere de course campaign.
In the 16th century, pirates were not idolized, but they often served a useful military purpose. As time went by these audacious men were idolized and romanticised. We do the same with the exploits of the WWI/II raiders. They were courageous men, and we give them credit, but they were still basically state sponsored pirates.
I draw the line with the Somaliu pirates of today, though to their own people, I am sure they are viewed as ruguish heroes
Pirates are just thieves in a boat, simple as that.
They don't give their money to the poor, so they can't be compared to Robin Hood. Neither do they have any form of chivalry or code of honor, or authority, thus they can neither be compared to knights.
The only thing pirates can be compared to are regular thieves, robbers burglars really.
They don't give their money to the poor, so they can't be compared to Robin Hood. Neither do they have any form of chivalry or code of honor, or authority, thus they can neither be compared to knights.
The only thing pirates can be compared to are regular thieves, robbers burglars really.
Last edited:
parsifal
Colonel
Not necessarily true. You may want to have a look at this and other sources before making sweeping statements like that
Welcome back incidentally.......
Pirates pursued democracy, helped American colonies survive
Welcome back incidentally.......
Pirates pursued democracy, helped American colonies survive
Thank you Parsi
Back to topic:
Pirates can still not be compared to the likes of Robin Hood or Knights. Pirates, while they may have introduced democracy on some level, were still thieves pillagers and they didn't share they values with others than themselves.
That having been said I have no issues with how they are being protrayed in films today, I don't even think about it to be honest. For me it's just intertainment.
Back to topic:
Pirates can still not be compared to the likes of Robin Hood or Knights. Pirates, while they may have introduced democracy on some level, were still thieves pillagers and they didn't share they values with others than themselves.
That having been said I have no issues with how they are being protrayed in films today, I don't even think about it to be honest. For me it's just intertainment.
I think people are thinking to much about this. It is a movie, nothing more. It is just entertainment...
Correct. But I find it fascinating to see that people are complaining about the romantic view on pirates while fully accepting that same view on knights. Especially on a history focussed forum like this one. Thus still a great thread as far as I'm concerned.
Lightning up isnt necessary because my observation is valid. I think it's strange that the whole pirate culture is celebrated. You can find rapists and murderers in every society but pirates were criminals in every describable way. Pirates were a CULTURE of Criminals built on crime and murder.
Tampa has a huge pirate fest:
Gasparilla Pirate Festival - Tampa, Florida
Nobody else finds it interesting that we celebrate and glorify "pirates" to this extent? Actually, I would have gone this year but I was scuba diving.
Its no different from having a festival built around gang bangers, car thieves, mass murders, kidnappers and drug dealers.
Yes they did help foster democracy. Lafitte, the Pirate, saved the Battle of New Orleans (even though the battle was unnecessary, it was a great morale boost.) Thanks Lafitte! With out his powder, men and cannon, the Brits probably would have won.
The difference between a privateer and a pirate is the same difference between a Freedom Fighter and a Terrorist.
I am a fan of Sir Francs Drake and John Paul Johns but whens the last time you say a Sir Francis Drake costume at Walmart? Yes they were "pirates" but they are not ingrained into our popular culture.
Isnt a bit weird that such horrid dregs of society are associated with such good, jolly times?
I can see it now ... "Homiefest 2080"...
Special Contest for "Best Meth Lab"
"Drive by Contest"
Halloween is about facing our ghoulish fears. I wouldnt keep a kid of mine from dressing up as a pirate if he wanted too. I just think it's bizarre that such a culture has such a joyous legacy!
.
Attachments
