What do you think?
Rate this book
Villains Of All Nations
Villains of All Nations" explores the 'Golden Age' of Atlantic piracy (1716-1726) and the infamous generation whose images underlie our modern, romanticized view of pirates.
Rediker introduces us to the dreaded black flag, the Jolly Roger; swashbuckling figures such as Edward Teach, better known as Blackbeard; and the unnamed, unlimbed pirate who was likely Robert Louis Stevenson's model for Long John Silver in Treasure Island.
This history shows from the bottom up how sailors emerged from deadly working conditions on merchant and naval ships, turned pirate, and created a starkly different reality aboard their own ships, electing their officers, dividing their booty equitably, and maintaining a multinational social order. The real lives of this motley crew-which included cross-dressing women, people of color, and the'outcasts of all nations'-are far more compelling than contemporary myth. "From the Hardcover edition.
Rediker introduces us to the dreaded black flag, the Jolly Roger; swashbuckling figures such as Edward Teach, better known as Blackbeard; and the unnamed, unlimbed pirate who was likely Robert Louis Stevenson's model for Long John Silver in Treasure Island.
This history shows from the bottom up how sailors emerged from deadly working conditions on merchant and naval ships, turned pirate, and created a starkly different reality aboard their own ships, electing their officers, dividing their booty equitably, and maintaining a multinational social order. The real lives of this motley crew-which included cross-dressing women, people of color, and the'outcasts of all nations'-are far more compelling than contemporary myth. "From the Hardcover edition.
256 pages, Paperback
First published June 15, 2004
About the author
Marcus Rediker
36 books199 followersMarcus Rediker is Distinguished Professor of Atlantic History at the University of Pittsburgh and Senior Research Fellow at the Collège d’études mondiales in Paris. He is the author of numerous prize-winning books, including The Many-Headed Hydra (with Peter Linebaugh), The Slave Ship, and The Amistad Rebellion. He produced the award-winning documentary film Ghosts of Amistad (Tony Buba, director), about how the Amistad Mutiny of 1839 lives on today in popular memory among the people of Sierra Leone.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 152 reviews
January 25, 2022
Probably the best account of the Golden Age of piracy (1714-26) out there, and one I have read numerous times. Rediker does an excellent job in examining the social and economic conditions that helped lead to the explosion of piracy that rocked the mid-Atlantic and put it into context. This is from a 'lefty' position, but Rediker considers a range of arguments here. I use this as a text book in my piracy class! If you want to know more about the famous pirates (e.g., Blackbeard, Black Bart, Anne Bonny, etc.), there are more comprehensive titles, but while Rediker does touch on some of the key figures, they are not the center point of the text.
Authors writing about the Golden Age of piracy tend to come from several distinct camps. One group simply condemns them as thieves and barbarians, but far more celebrate these pirates for a variety of reasons. Peter Leeson, in his The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates, sees them as self-interested criminals intent only on securing the booty-- e.g., profits. Reading them through a libertarian lens, he explains their on-board democracy and other things as simply tools to extract profits from hapless merchants of the era. Others focus on individual pirates, such as Edward Teach (Blackbeard), or Anne Bonny, covering their exploits. What Rediker does instead is give an overview of the socio-economic background that propelled sailors into 'going on the account'.
Yet, while pirates obviously need to survive and 'booty' was necessary for this, Rediker paints a much more nuanced understanding of pirate activity. Added to the quest for booty, for example, are things such as 'doing justice to sailors', or holding rogue or abusive captains accountable after taking their ships. Often, if the crew spoke up in defense of the captain, they would even let the ship go after minor or no pillaging! Rediker writes compelling that these pirates were products of their time; facing an unjust, ridged hierarchy on merchant and naval ships, pirates created a system where each person (all races and genders included) have a democratic say in their destiny, really the first time such a system ever really worked, or was even tried. These pirates wanted revenge on the system that produced such stark inequalities in society and to change the world for the better. Really an inspiring book! 5 black flags!!
Authors writing about the Golden Age of piracy tend to come from several distinct camps. One group simply condemns them as thieves and barbarians, but far more celebrate these pirates for a variety of reasons. Peter Leeson, in his The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates, sees them as self-interested criminals intent only on securing the booty-- e.g., profits. Reading them through a libertarian lens, he explains their on-board democracy and other things as simply tools to extract profits from hapless merchants of the era. Others focus on individual pirates, such as Edward Teach (Blackbeard), or Anne Bonny, covering their exploits. What Rediker does instead is give an overview of the socio-economic background that propelled sailors into 'going on the account'.
Yet, while pirates obviously need to survive and 'booty' was necessary for this, Rediker paints a much more nuanced understanding of pirate activity. Added to the quest for booty, for example, are things such as 'doing justice to sailors', or holding rogue or abusive captains accountable after taking their ships. Often, if the crew spoke up in defense of the captain, they would even let the ship go after minor or no pillaging! Rediker writes compelling that these pirates were products of their time; facing an unjust, ridged hierarchy on merchant and naval ships, pirates created a system where each person (all races and genders included) have a democratic say in their destiny, really the first time such a system ever really worked, or was even tried. These pirates wanted revenge on the system that produced such stark inequalities in society and to change the world for the better. Really an inspiring book! 5 black flags!!
October 18, 2015
This was a purely enjoyable read. Pirates live up to their reputation.
There is absolutely some romanticization going on here. Rediker wants to justify a lot about what pirates did, saying it was for noble political reasons. And he provides many illustrative anecdotes that back up what he says. He definitely convinced me, but I still think it's highly probably other barbarities existed that he didn't bother to cover because they might not jive with his narrative.
Overall, I continue to think histories like this are just invaluable. The dominant political/economic system would have you believe that it's inevitable, that this is the only way things can be, and that your radical idealistic ideas are silly fantasies. But all of our radical idealistic ideas are actually ancient, and we are just the current generation fighting a battle that has been waged, with varying degrees of success throughout human history. We have alternatives. It's so illustrative to see how previous generations have pursued them.
The biggest shortcoming in this book is in his treatment of race. He makes mention that plenty of pirates were Black, and he devotes quite a bit of attention to how pirates interrupted the Atlantic slave trade by capturing slaving vessels. But he completely glosses over the interaction between piracy and slavery. What happened to slave ships captured by pirates? What happened to the slaves in the slaving fortresses pirates burned down? Did pirates interfere with slaving vessels because they were consciously fighting against slavery, or because that was the best loot? When they sank slaving vessels, were there slaves on board? Did they return captured slaves to Africa, or did they continue on and sell them themselves? Rediker just did not even attempt to make all of this clear; a plausible conjecture would be that the answers to these questions did not support his theory of pirates as liberators. I'd love to see sources that address this more particularly.
There is absolutely some romanticization going on here. Rediker wants to justify a lot about what pirates did, saying it was for noble political reasons. And he provides many illustrative anecdotes that back up what he says. He definitely convinced me, but I still think it's highly probably other barbarities existed that he didn't bother to cover because they might not jive with his narrative.
Overall, I continue to think histories like this are just invaluable. The dominant political/economic system would have you believe that it's inevitable, that this is the only way things can be, and that your radical idealistic ideas are silly fantasies. But all of our radical idealistic ideas are actually ancient, and we are just the current generation fighting a battle that has been waged, with varying degrees of success throughout human history. We have alternatives. It's so illustrative to see how previous generations have pursued them.
The biggest shortcoming in this book is in his treatment of race. He makes mention that plenty of pirates were Black, and he devotes quite a bit of attention to how pirates interrupted the Atlantic slave trade by capturing slaving vessels. But he completely glosses over the interaction between piracy and slavery. What happened to slave ships captured by pirates? What happened to the slaves in the slaving fortresses pirates burned down? Did pirates interfere with slaving vessels because they were consciously fighting against slavery, or because that was the best loot? When they sank slaving vessels, were there slaves on board? Did they return captured slaves to Africa, or did they continue on and sell them themselves? Rediker just did not even attempt to make all of this clear; a plausible conjecture would be that the answers to these questions did not support his theory of pirates as liberators. I'd love to see sources that address this more particularly.
June 8, 2016
sometimes, you just have to read a radical history of pirates. and sometimes it's just what you need.
May 9, 2025
Very interesting and informative. I will write a short review soon...
June 25, 2009
After reading The Many-headed Hydra co-authored by Peter Linebaugh, I picked this book up. Although Rediker follows the same theme as that previous work, the tone of Villains of All Nations is more academic and less overtly political. That's not to say that Rediker does not continue the materialist theme developed in The Many-Headed Hydra, which is that piracy of the 17th & 18th Century was both encouraged by and a reaction against the political and social policies of the Great Powers.
The book develops a number of ideas. First, pirates were largely proletariat, reacting to perceived injustices committed against them by the Crown and the merchant class. Piracy represented an escape from bondage (both from poverty and impressment) as well as a means of creating a new egalitarian social order. Pirate society was participatory; their articles had codes for limiting the power of their captains, an equitable system for sharing loot, and even a form of disability insurance. In this, as well as in their decisions to plunder or pass on captured merchant ships, pirates perceived themselves as following a particular (albeit contrary to the larger society) moral code. This moral code has its origin in what pirates consider to be just relations between a merchant captain and crew, but also extends into other realms of just social relations. Rediker devotes a chapter on Anne Read and Mary Bonny to build a modest case for their feminist influence on the larger culture (although he concedes that Victorian attitudes towards femininity during the 19th Century reversed any progress made).
Far more interesting is the various interests aligned against piracy. From encouraging piracy during the Queen Anne's War (War of Spanish Succession), England devoted more of its resources to expunging pirates to the degree that it interfered with emerging trade interests (by "trade interests" I mean exploitation of natural and human resources). As sugar, slaves, and flour in turn became hot commodities, the war against pirates - who represented the greatest resistance to capital - intensified, until 1726 when piracy was effectively exterminated.
This is a great alternative to the Hollywood stereotypes about pirates. Viewed within the larger (and typically cruel) social context, this book serves to humanize those who have historically been demonized, presenting them as sympathetic figures without reducing them to the comical, like more recent films have done. Maybe someday soon the Somali "pirates" will get a similar treatment.
The book develops a number of ideas. First, pirates were largely proletariat, reacting to perceived injustices committed against them by the Crown and the merchant class. Piracy represented an escape from bondage (both from poverty and impressment) as well as a means of creating a new egalitarian social order. Pirate society was participatory; their articles had codes for limiting the power of their captains, an equitable system for sharing loot, and even a form of disability insurance. In this, as well as in their decisions to plunder or pass on captured merchant ships, pirates perceived themselves as following a particular (albeit contrary to the larger society) moral code. This moral code has its origin in what pirates consider to be just relations between a merchant captain and crew, but also extends into other realms of just social relations. Rediker devotes a chapter on Anne Read and Mary Bonny to build a modest case for their feminist influence on the larger culture (although he concedes that Victorian attitudes towards femininity during the 19th Century reversed any progress made).
Far more interesting is the various interests aligned against piracy. From encouraging piracy during the Queen Anne's War (War of Spanish Succession), England devoted more of its resources to expunging pirates to the degree that it interfered with emerging trade interests (by "trade interests" I mean exploitation of natural and human resources). As sugar, slaves, and flour in turn became hot commodities, the war against pirates - who represented the greatest resistance to capital - intensified, until 1726 when piracy was effectively exterminated.
This is a great alternative to the Hollywood stereotypes about pirates. Viewed within the larger (and typically cruel) social context, this book serves to humanize those who have historically been demonized, presenting them as sympathetic figures without reducing them to the comical, like more recent films have done. Maybe someday soon the Somali "pirates" will get a similar treatment.
August 23, 2026
This is carefully-sourced history, but told in such a breezy and engaging way. Here's a sample of the kind of rousing pirate speech this book uncovers (from pirate captain Charles Bellamy, to a captured captain):
damn ye, you are a sneaking Puppy, and so are all those who will submit to be governed by Laws which rich Men have made for their own Security, for the cowardly Whelps have not the Courage otherwise to defend what they get by their Knavery; but damn ye altogether: Damn them for a Pack of crafty Rascals, and you, who serve them, for a Parcel of hen-hearted Numskuls. They villify us, the Scoundrels do, when there is only this Difference, they rob the Poor under the Cover of Law, forsooth, and we plunder the Rich under the Protection of our own Courage.(Also: if you're a fan of Our Flag Means Death, you'll find some of your favorite characters and plot points here. Shocking connections. Did that silly show's creator read Rediker??)
December 19, 2019
This is always the most popular book in my Pirates, captives and slaves class. I think students enjoy getting a bit of a Marxist perspective and cheering on the villains. I don’t think it should be read without another perspective on piracy since it tends to valorize this group. I have my own suspicions of state formation but I wouldn’t trade my intrusive state for piracy ever.
February 16, 2023
Marcus Rediker a un savoir absolument énorme, un nombre de sources incalculable et une manière fascinante de raconter l'histoire "d'en bas". De loin un des meilleurs livres que j'ai pu lire, vraiment passionnant. Et les avant-propos et postface sont aussi hyper enrichissant !
February 22, 2023
It was fine, enjoyed some bits more than others.
December 7, 2025
Wonderful book. I'm so impressed by his ability to write clearly and accessibly whilst simultaneously advancing theoretically interesting arguments.
Wish he'd spent a little more time exploring some qualifications to the overall thesis, particularly the relationship between pirates and slavery, but I don't think this hugely detracts from the argument.
Definitely want to read the Many Headed Hydra
Wish he'd spent a little more time exploring some qualifications to the overall thesis, particularly the relationship between pirates and slavery, but I don't think this hugely detracts from the argument.
Definitely want to read the Many Headed Hydra
Read
September 28, 2019i skipped like 2 chapters of this but i learned a lot from it and i love the concept of maritime escapism and piracy as an attack on wealthy colonials
August 11, 2025
I’ve been on a pirate kick, so I decided to read this one again. Just as good as I remember it!
June 18, 2025
Saggio molto interessante che mette chiarezza e dettaglio in una parte della Storia conosciuta in parte da tutti, ma in maniera approssimativa.
Affascinante il sistema sociale e legale creato dai pirati, in totale opposizione della logica capitalistica che governava e governa il mondo. Ed affascinante anche il modo in cui Rediker lo racconta, in un mix di precisione ed ironia.
Affascinante il sistema sociale e legale creato dai pirati, in totale opposizione della logica capitalistica che governava e governa il mondo. Ed affascinante anche il modo in cui Rediker lo racconta, in un mix di precisione ed ironia.
March 2, 2024
Pirates of the golden age
1. From privateers with the English Queen’s decree to rob Spanish vessels, to independent contractors hated by all authorities
2. They robbed merchant vessels and used terror to make them surrender willingly. People who fought back were tortured and killed.
3. They came from England 50% of the time. The rest were international. Mostly sailors who volunteered to joined them. Mostly poor people, orphans without family.
4. Sailors were oppressed during the time, with captains wielding tremendous power. Food and drinks were scarce.
5. The pirates wanted to be different. They elected their own captain who only earned half to one share more. The captain was only supreme in combat. The rest of the time the council would decide. The Quartermaster acted as the treasurer and counterweight to the captain.
6. They would treat nice captains civilly, but torture bad ones. Lots of the pirates would have worked under the captains before.
7. Such was their reputation for violence that even the naval soldiers and captains were too scared to fight them sometimes.
8. They sometimes threw goods they cannot sell into the sea, and burned ships just to spite the captain.
9. Women and boys were generally not allowed but there were female pirates such as Anne Bonny and Mary Mead. They were even braver and better in fighting than the average pirate
10. They lived a life of leisure, song, and fun. But they died young
11. At the end of the era, more pirates were hanged and they became more vicious. Some captains chose to retire. The crown paid any sailors who would resist. Ultimately the governments won.
1. From privateers with the English Queen’s decree to rob Spanish vessels, to independent contractors hated by all authorities
2. They robbed merchant vessels and used terror to make them surrender willingly. People who fought back were tortured and killed.
3. They came from England 50% of the time. The rest were international. Mostly sailors who volunteered to joined them. Mostly poor people, orphans without family.
4. Sailors were oppressed during the time, with captains wielding tremendous power. Food and drinks were scarce.
5. The pirates wanted to be different. They elected their own captain who only earned half to one share more. The captain was only supreme in combat. The rest of the time the council would decide. The Quartermaster acted as the treasurer and counterweight to the captain.
6. They would treat nice captains civilly, but torture bad ones. Lots of the pirates would have worked under the captains before.
7. Such was their reputation for violence that even the naval soldiers and captains were too scared to fight them sometimes.
8. They sometimes threw goods they cannot sell into the sea, and burned ships just to spite the captain.
9. Women and boys were generally not allowed but there were female pirates such as Anne Bonny and Mary Mead. They were even braver and better in fighting than the average pirate
10. They lived a life of leisure, song, and fun. But they died young
11. At the end of the era, more pirates were hanged and they became more vicious. Some captains chose to retire. The crown paid any sailors who would resist. Ultimately the governments won.
October 4, 2019
Very informational and easy to understand. Rediker, however, is unable to convince me of his point of how "ordered" piracy was when he constantly contradicts this afore declared statement by discussing the chaos of piracy.
August 15, 2020
Le livre parle des pirates du XVIIIème, de leur histoire, de leur modèle d'organisation, des membres les plus connus et de leur place dans l'histoire de la lutte des classes.
Concrètement, si vous pensez avoir une bonne idée de ce qu'étaient les pirates en regardant Pirates des Caraïbes, j'ai une mauvaise nouvelle pour vous. Les pirates étaient des bons gros anarchistes comme on les aime, tous les membres de l'équipage étaient égaux, les décisions étaient prises démocratiquement et les capitaines étaient élus à la mission en fonction de leurs capacités, et étaient révocables.
Rediker décrit, avec une lourde bibliographie, à quel point les pirates étaient intrinsèquement contre la propriété privée et tout ce que cela implique en terme d'opposition à l'esclavage. Il souligne que l'esclavagisme a été boosté par la fin de la piraterie, alors qu'il était à son niveau le plus bas (pré-abolition) pendant l'âge d'or. De même, il rapporte de nombreux cas où les pirates ajustent le traitement de leurs adversaires, notamment des capitaines ennemis, en fonction des bons ou mauvais traitements qu'ils infligeaient à leurs équipages.
Le concept de charte était essentiel dans la piraterie, et les pirates qui refusaient de signer celle de leur bâtiment étaient tout simplement exclu du processus démocratique ou des missions qui permettaient d'obtenir du butin. Dans cette charte, Rediker souligne la nécessité de protection des femmes capturées et l'interdiction du viol sous peine de mise à mort. Les relations homosexuelles étaient sanctionnées aussi, mais dans les faits, c'était toléré, c'était surtout pour éviter les tensions inhérentes à une situation de couple sur le bâtiment.
Ce qui m'a le plus intéressé, c'est comment les pirates s'inscrivent dans la dialectique évolutionniste, c'est à dire que spontanément, les marins ne deviennent pas pirates, c'est seulement pour s'adapter à des conditions de vie néfastes (manque de nourriture, violences du capitaine, etc) que les marins se mutinent et hissent le drapeau noir, décoré avec un symbole pouvant être relié au prolétariat, avant de voguer sur les flots pour libérer des esclaves et piller du bourgeois et les États. Autre point intéressant, cette véritable phylogénie de la piraterie. En effet, par des scissions d'équipages, un même équipage pouvait donner différents petits bâtiments qui prosperaient, avec leur propre culture qui était légèrement différente de leur équipage de base, qui évoluait en fonction des prises de navires et de l'instabilité chronique des marins. Puis ces équipages pouvaient subir une scission et ainsi de suite. Il est du coup possible de créer un graphique qui retrace la filiation des équipages au cours du temps, ce que Rediker a fait.
Le livre est de taille moyenne (237 pages ebook téléphone) pour un prix de 10€. Est-ce que je le conseille ? Oui, c'est ultra intéressant de lire la vie de pirates renommés et de leurs équipages, surtout qu'il y a beaucoup de pages dédiées au quotidien de ces derniers, et ça permet de remettre en perspective bien des choses relatives à la piraterie.
Concrètement, si vous pensez avoir une bonne idée de ce qu'étaient les pirates en regardant Pirates des Caraïbes, j'ai une mauvaise nouvelle pour vous. Les pirates étaient des bons gros anarchistes comme on les aime, tous les membres de l'équipage étaient égaux, les décisions étaient prises démocratiquement et les capitaines étaient élus à la mission en fonction de leurs capacités, et étaient révocables.
Rediker décrit, avec une lourde bibliographie, à quel point les pirates étaient intrinsèquement contre la propriété privée et tout ce que cela implique en terme d'opposition à l'esclavage. Il souligne que l'esclavagisme a été boosté par la fin de la piraterie, alors qu'il était à son niveau le plus bas (pré-abolition) pendant l'âge d'or. De même, il rapporte de nombreux cas où les pirates ajustent le traitement de leurs adversaires, notamment des capitaines ennemis, en fonction des bons ou mauvais traitements qu'ils infligeaient à leurs équipages.
Le concept de charte était essentiel dans la piraterie, et les pirates qui refusaient de signer celle de leur bâtiment étaient tout simplement exclu du processus démocratique ou des missions qui permettaient d'obtenir du butin. Dans cette charte, Rediker souligne la nécessité de protection des femmes capturées et l'interdiction du viol sous peine de mise à mort. Les relations homosexuelles étaient sanctionnées aussi, mais dans les faits, c'était toléré, c'était surtout pour éviter les tensions inhérentes à une situation de couple sur le bâtiment.
Ce qui m'a le plus intéressé, c'est comment les pirates s'inscrivent dans la dialectique évolutionniste, c'est à dire que spontanément, les marins ne deviennent pas pirates, c'est seulement pour s'adapter à des conditions de vie néfastes (manque de nourriture, violences du capitaine, etc) que les marins se mutinent et hissent le drapeau noir, décoré avec un symbole pouvant être relié au prolétariat, avant de voguer sur les flots pour libérer des esclaves et piller du bourgeois et les États. Autre point intéressant, cette véritable phylogénie de la piraterie. En effet, par des scissions d'équipages, un même équipage pouvait donner différents petits bâtiments qui prosperaient, avec leur propre culture qui était légèrement différente de leur équipage de base, qui évoluait en fonction des prises de navires et de l'instabilité chronique des marins. Puis ces équipages pouvaient subir une scission et ainsi de suite. Il est du coup possible de créer un graphique qui retrace la filiation des équipages au cours du temps, ce que Rediker a fait.
Le livre est de taille moyenne (237 pages ebook téléphone) pour un prix de 10€. Est-ce que je le conseille ? Oui, c'est ultra intéressant de lire la vie de pirates renommés et de leurs équipages, surtout qu'il y a beaucoup de pages dédiées au quotidien de ces derniers, et ça permet de remettre en perspective bien des choses relatives à la piraterie.
July 10, 2024
Muy buen libro para explorar el sentido histórico y social de la piratería a principios del siglo XVIII. Es claro, interesante, está bien investigado, y mantiene un buen equilibrio entre no dejarse llevar por el sensacionalismo de la leyenda y no ignorar absolutamente la realidad de las personas individuales en pos de una gran narrativa. Las "anécdotas" están perfectamente enmarcadas. Leer historia social así siempre es un placer.
Sí tengo que decir que me resultó un poco reiterativo; a veces hay tres párrafos al hilo que dicen básicamente lo mismo, y las mismas ideas se repiten numerosas veces a lo largo del libro. Y esto no es culpa del texto pero lo menciono porque su título es un poco engañoso: sí, el libro habla de la piratería atlántica en general, y menciona sus aristas y los diversos orígenes de sus protagonistas. Pero, incluso considerando la abrumadora mayoría inglesa, me faltó un poco de data descentrada del imperio británico y sus (ex)súbditos. Todo gira muchísimo alrededor de los piratas ingleses y la administración inglesa en las islas del Caribe, lo cual es esperable y lógico pero un poco decepcionante.
En cualquier caso recomiendo.
Sí tengo que decir que me resultó un poco reiterativo; a veces hay tres párrafos al hilo que dicen básicamente lo mismo, y las mismas ideas se repiten numerosas veces a lo largo del libro. Y esto no es culpa del texto pero lo menciono porque su título es un poco engañoso: sí, el libro habla de la piratería atlántica en general, y menciona sus aristas y los diversos orígenes de sus protagonistas. Pero, incluso considerando la abrumadora mayoría inglesa, me faltó un poco de data descentrada del imperio británico y sus (ex)súbditos. Todo gira muchísimo alrededor de los piratas ingleses y la administración inglesa en las islas del Caribe, lo cual es esperable y lógico pero un poco decepcionante.
En cualquier caso recomiendo.
July 7, 2025
there's some conflict within Rediker's thesis about the organisation of pirate ships as anti capitalist bastions on the open seas, but then discussing the inherent bloodlust of pirates which saw their eventual demise. Not that these two conclusions are mutually exclusive, but the language used to explain this dialectic is weirdly adversarial.
on the whole, VoAN is a fantastic counter history of the golden age of piracy, which emphasises thier very existence as a challenge to class based society and its notions of race, gender, and other politics. There are nuggets of greatness in what is a fairly robust history.
first heard about this novel on the episode of Working Class History podcast with Rediker.
on the whole, VoAN is a fantastic counter history of the golden age of piracy, which emphasises thier very existence as a challenge to class based society and its notions of race, gender, and other politics. There are nuggets of greatness in what is a fairly robust history.
first heard about this novel on the episode of Working Class History podcast with Rediker.
May 13, 2024
Starts off really good. Got me interested and kept me reading.
Then I got to about page 70 and it just was same sh*t over and over again; same pirates, same story.
However, I did learn that Pirates were originally basically, libertarians (I didn’t mind that), and damn near all of them died because once you go “Jolly Rodger” you never go BACK… (something like that).
I prefer Rediker’s, “Slave Ship,” over this one. However, this is coming from someone who was never into pirates - I’ve never seen the pirate movies with Johnny Depp and I didn’t like “Hook” and was glad One-Eyed Willy got what was coming to him in “The Goonies.”
Cya
Then I got to about page 70 and it just was same sh*t over and over again; same pirates, same story.
However, I did learn that Pirates were originally basically, libertarians (I didn’t mind that), and damn near all of them died because once you go “Jolly Rodger” you never go BACK… (something like that).
I prefer Rediker’s, “Slave Ship,” over this one. However, this is coming from someone who was never into pirates - I’ve never seen the pirate movies with Johnny Depp and I didn’t like “Hook” and was glad One-Eyed Willy got what was coming to him in “The Goonies.”
Cya
September 16, 2025
Rediker’s thesis immediately makes sense, even more so when presented w all the primary sources. Makes me think a lot about the legacy of anarchist living on the fringes and property destruction now. How unique the unit of the boat was at a time when oceans represented a commons of sorts. Sodomy chapter could have been researched a bit more, too. All in all, thoroughly enjoyable. I’d say it’s a pirate’s life for me but I’m not exactly living that life now am I?
September 20, 2025
Uno de los mejores ensayos históricos que he leído. La piratería entendida por primera vez para mí como acto revolucionario; vista más allá de la visión romántica o de un conjunto de anécdotas sobre aventuras. El autor, desde una visión analítica, trata la piratería del siglo XVIII cómo uno de los primeros movimientos proletarios de la Europa moderna. Totalmente recomendada: es una obra inspiradora, informativa y con una conciencia de clase profundamente acentuada.
March 27, 2025
ahora quiero ser pirata
June 17, 2025
Väldigt intressant!
October 3, 2021
Great book! Really describes the general stance on pirates and how/why that stance evolved.
July 10, 2016
What is it about pirates that is so universally appealing to the romantic imagination? One need look no further for the answer to this question than this fabulous book which tells the story of the pirates in the "golden age" of piracy (a brief period from about 1690 to about 1730 or so). The book provides a clear history of piracy on the high seas, with fascinating character outlines and histories provided for all the best-known (and most beloved) pirate figures (think Edward "Blackbeard" Teach, who apparently stuck lit sparklers into his beard and under his hat so that he looked like the Devil himself; Anne Bonny, the Captain Morgan - of the Rum fame I'm assuming - and Mary Read). Despite being - as Rediker makes clear - the first terrorists (before the label had even been invented) these were generally hard-done by chaps, mistreated in the Navy, who had dared to imagine a life of freedom, and, what's more "dared to try to live it." (p. 175).
So entertaining - such a good read - and so well-written. If you like historical pirates and tales of rip-roaring adventure on the high seas - this is the book for you.
So entertaining - such a good read - and so well-written. If you like historical pirates and tales of rip-roaring adventure on the high seas - this is the book for you.
October 16, 2011
Rediker has an agenda. He wants to show that when the pirates were cruel, it was in revenge for cruelty. What they were is what they were made into by the exploitative economic system they were born into. Perhaps mostly true. But he sometimes over idealizes his subjects who still often tortured sailors and officers to find valuables on the ships.
“They transformed harsh discipline into a looser, more libertarian way of running their ship that depended on ‘what Punishment the Captain and Majority of the Company shall think fit.’ They transformed the realities of chronically meager rations into riotous chronic feasting, an exploitative wage relation into a collective risk bearing, and injury and premature death into active health care and security. Their democratic selection of officers stood in stark contrast to the near-dictatorial arrangement of command in the merchant service and the Royal Navy.” 154-5
“They transformed harsh discipline into a looser, more libertarian way of running their ship that depended on ‘what Punishment the Captain and Majority of the Company shall think fit.’ They transformed the realities of chronically meager rations into riotous chronic feasting, an exploitative wage relation into a collective risk bearing, and injury and premature death into active health care and security. Their democratic selection of officers stood in stark contrast to the near-dictatorial arrangement of command in the merchant service and the Royal Navy.” 154-5
March 26, 2024
The classic work of radical pirateology. Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Merchant Seamen, Pirates and the Anglo-American Maritime World, 1700–1750 was a landmark volume in the field, opening up scholarship on the abusive labour conditions of the 17th century maritime industry that motivated sailors into murdering their captains and going on the account, but this is where Rediker makes his most radical and provocative arguments.
Here pirates are depicted as self-consciously political actors, willingly throwing their lives away for a few years of glorious freedom, rollicking across the waves in defiance of god, country, and the productive logics of capitalism, and in the process opening up spaces for multiracial alliances, retribution against cruel captains, and even for the occasional woman to sneak on board and live the wild life alongside them.
As ever, one has to be cautious with history-from-below narratives for how awkwardly they must torture their source material to spill its potential secrets. Rediker's The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic, for instance, has been criticised for its cherry-picked and misread sources, as well as a hysterical exaggeration of apocalyptic social conditions in order to justify the thunderous momentum of his Marxist teleology.
Fortunately, Rediker appears to be on steadier ground when sticking to the rolling decks of his pirate ships, though in the end that might be because with a source as beguiling as Captain Johnson's A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates to rely on you can kind of get away with anything. Johnson's book has so frequently been backed up by sober captain's logs and legal transcripts from the era that historians are ultimately at the mercy of his caprices when it comes to his wilder claims, and what a historian chooses to believe in the absence of any other source of such dazzling richness is ultimately going to be one of faith and ideological bias. Rediker's greatest quality is that he doesn't pretend otherwise.
Every page of this book has something brilliant to say. I had to force myself not to underline every second sentence, so lively, sharp, and audaciously exciting are his ideas and the sources he brings to bear on them. Strange as it is to say, I think his conservative rival, David Cordingly actually has a less firm grasp on the slipperiness of his sources, which just shows that Rediker can be brilliant when he puts the work in.
That said, I am not entirely convinced by Rediker's handling of the racial politics of piracy. Yes pirates did parody and exploit the nation-states that employed and then exterminated them, but patriotic piracy was a thing and he does not acknowledge the colonial dynamics of the pirate settlements he celebrates that any reading of Exquemelin's The Buccaneers of America will immediately expose.
Instead, he pulls what I think is a rather dirty trick by insinuating - without actually claiming it directly - that pirates were some kind of slave abolitionists. He does this by frequently mentioning the disruption that pirates caused to the slave trade, and how black people on pirate ships captured by authorities were seldom tried but instead immediately sold into slavery, suggestive of a racially segregated justice system that did not recognise an egalitarian fellowship on board. Now we do have records of black men serving on pirate ships (in subordinate positions to everyone else usually), but they also served on pirate ships carrying slaves, so we can't assume that the presence of black pirates means that pirates were anti-slavery - far from it, they presumably wanted a share of the profits. Maybe. Or maybe not. It's often difficult to tell, but Rediker doesn't dwell on this ambiguity, and instead silently omits mention of it so as to insinuate something more radical than the sources can really support.
I wasn't even sure if this was what Rediker was doing until I read the comic he helped create, Under the Banner of King Death: Pirates of the Atlantic, which explicitly depicts a cross-racial anti-slavery pirate alliance. This is a hopeful image, and extremely cool, but I'm not sure it's particularly radical history to make real life slaves the pawns of a revisionist white saviour fantasy. Or at the very least, it's not radical to do so so irresponsibly. The oceans hold too many bones for that.
Nevertheless, a comparative read of this alongside David Cordingly's more conservative Life Among the Pirates will serve as a brilliant introduction to the dynamics of pirate history. And if nothing else, this book is worth the price of admission alone for his wacky, but compelling, argument that Delacroix's Liberty Leading the People is actually based on this image of Anne Bonny/Mary Read from a 1725 edition of Captain Charles Johnson's book:
Here pirates are depicted as self-consciously political actors, willingly throwing their lives away for a few years of glorious freedom, rollicking across the waves in defiance of god, country, and the productive logics of capitalism, and in the process opening up spaces for multiracial alliances, retribution against cruel captains, and even for the occasional woman to sneak on board and live the wild life alongside them.
As ever, one has to be cautious with history-from-below narratives for how awkwardly they must torture their source material to spill its potential secrets. Rediker's The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic, for instance, has been criticised for its cherry-picked and misread sources, as well as a hysterical exaggeration of apocalyptic social conditions in order to justify the thunderous momentum of his Marxist teleology.
Fortunately, Rediker appears to be on steadier ground when sticking to the rolling decks of his pirate ships, though in the end that might be because with a source as beguiling as Captain Johnson's A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates to rely on you can kind of get away with anything. Johnson's book has so frequently been backed up by sober captain's logs and legal transcripts from the era that historians are ultimately at the mercy of his caprices when it comes to his wilder claims, and what a historian chooses to believe in the absence of any other source of such dazzling richness is ultimately going to be one of faith and ideological bias. Rediker's greatest quality is that he doesn't pretend otherwise.
Every page of this book has something brilliant to say. I had to force myself not to underline every second sentence, so lively, sharp, and audaciously exciting are his ideas and the sources he brings to bear on them. Strange as it is to say, I think his conservative rival, David Cordingly actually has a less firm grasp on the slipperiness of his sources, which just shows that Rediker can be brilliant when he puts the work in.
That said, I am not entirely convinced by Rediker's handling of the racial politics of piracy. Yes pirates did parody and exploit the nation-states that employed and then exterminated them, but patriotic piracy was a thing and he does not acknowledge the colonial dynamics of the pirate settlements he celebrates that any reading of Exquemelin's The Buccaneers of America will immediately expose.
Instead, he pulls what I think is a rather dirty trick by insinuating - without actually claiming it directly - that pirates were some kind of slave abolitionists. He does this by frequently mentioning the disruption that pirates caused to the slave trade, and how black people on pirate ships captured by authorities were seldom tried but instead immediately sold into slavery, suggestive of a racially segregated justice system that did not recognise an egalitarian fellowship on board. Now we do have records of black men serving on pirate ships (in subordinate positions to everyone else usually), but they also served on pirate ships carrying slaves, so we can't assume that the presence of black pirates means that pirates were anti-slavery - far from it, they presumably wanted a share of the profits. Maybe. Or maybe not. It's often difficult to tell, but Rediker doesn't dwell on this ambiguity, and instead silently omits mention of it so as to insinuate something more radical than the sources can really support.
I wasn't even sure if this was what Rediker was doing until I read the comic he helped create, Under the Banner of King Death: Pirates of the Atlantic, which explicitly depicts a cross-racial anti-slavery pirate alliance. This is a hopeful image, and extremely cool, but I'm not sure it's particularly radical history to make real life slaves the pawns of a revisionist white saviour fantasy. Or at the very least, it's not radical to do so so irresponsibly. The oceans hold too many bones for that.
Nevertheless, a comparative read of this alongside David Cordingly's more conservative Life Among the Pirates will serve as a brilliant introduction to the dynamics of pirate history. And if nothing else, this book is worth the price of admission alone for his wacky, but compelling, argument that Delacroix's Liberty Leading the People is actually based on this image of Anne Bonny/Mary Read from a 1725 edition of Captain Charles Johnson's book:
May 29, 2016
I REALLY LOVE PIRATES EVEN MORE AFTER THIS BOOK WOW
September 24, 2020
Marcus Rediker, in Villains of all Nations, has attempted to paint a picture of the unpleasantness of life as a sailor in the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Atlantic World. Rediker shows rather convincingly that the wider public regarded sailors as inept, immature, and childlike, needing to be constantly looked after and controlled. Rediker likens the treatment of sailors to enslavement, giving ample examples of laws created in the Atlantic colonies to control sailors by limiting their rights and their mobility. In Rediker’s argument, the sailor’s natural inclination was to take up piracy, as it provided the only means of rebellion against the very world that had seemingly arrayed itself against him. Rediker attempts to unite these disparate groups of outlaws together by means of a common ideology opposed to inherited authority, founded upon meritocracy. Rediker argues that pirates were thus organized in an egalitarian fashion, with plunder being divided in a much more equitable way, important decisions being put to a vote in which all men had equal voting power, and plenty of food and liquor to be had. Standing in stark contrast to the rigid discipline of the merchant world and navy, pirates set out to define their own world by making war against the existing one.
Rediker does a great thing in his works by pointing out the horrid working conditions that many seamen faced in the eighteenth century. Rediker’s emphasis upon this is effective to his argument, and one is inevitably led to the conclusion that piracy was the natural reaction to a life of oppressed service onboard a merchant or naval vessel. However, Rediker’s strong emphasis upon the divide between authority figures and the proletariat smacks of a Marxist apologetic superimposition. Not that Marxism is anathema to historical interpretations, but to impose a thoroughly modern framework upon the past is difficult to do accurately. Were all pirates everywhere aware of the reasons why every other pirate chose to desert or mutiny and take up arms against innocent merchants? To thus unite all pirates together under one cause is painting much too broad of a stroke. While conditions by and large were not favorable to seamen, a far larger number of men continued to work in that environment than took up arms against it, making pirates somewhat of an anomaly.
Rediker, while giving ample examples of the executions of pirates and their ilk, includes very little examples of pirate atrocities committed against innocent people. Rediker seems to have much too approving of a posture towards pirates, instead pointing out the “terror” that the state wielded as being a cause for their rebellion. After finishing Rediker’s works, one must be grateful for the deep research that is apparent in them. However, one is also left desiring a more balanced analysis to the activity of Atlantic pirates.
Rediker does a great thing in his works by pointing out the horrid working conditions that many seamen faced in the eighteenth century. Rediker’s emphasis upon this is effective to his argument, and one is inevitably led to the conclusion that piracy was the natural reaction to a life of oppressed service onboard a merchant or naval vessel. However, Rediker’s strong emphasis upon the divide between authority figures and the proletariat smacks of a Marxist apologetic superimposition. Not that Marxism is anathema to historical interpretations, but to impose a thoroughly modern framework upon the past is difficult to do accurately. Were all pirates everywhere aware of the reasons why every other pirate chose to desert or mutiny and take up arms against innocent merchants? To thus unite all pirates together under one cause is painting much too broad of a stroke. While conditions by and large were not favorable to seamen, a far larger number of men continued to work in that environment than took up arms against it, making pirates somewhat of an anomaly.
Rediker, while giving ample examples of the executions of pirates and their ilk, includes very little examples of pirate atrocities committed against innocent people. Rediker seems to have much too approving of a posture towards pirates, instead pointing out the “terror” that the state wielded as being a cause for their rebellion. After finishing Rediker’s works, one must be grateful for the deep research that is apparent in them. However, one is also left desiring a more balanced analysis to the activity of Atlantic pirates.
December 12, 2024
Un saggio dalla scrittura semplice e scorrevole. Questo vuole essere un libro didattico sulla storia della pirateria e quindi, per dimostrare la veridicità delle sue tesi, riporta innumerevoli citazioni da testi, processi e altre fonti.
Se avessi letto questo libro per scrivere una ricerca accademica, sarei rimasto estremamente soddisfatto proprio grazie alla quantità e alla qualità delle fonti. Purtroppo, però, leggendolo per mera curiosità, a volte mi è risultato eccessivamente ripetitivo e, molto più raramente, quasi noioso per i temi trattati. Sono comunque riuscito a finirlo perché gli spunti di riflessione sono innumerevoli e ogni volta che stavo per abbandonare la lettura, qualche informazione interessante mi riportava tra le pagine del libro.
Non so se lo consiglierei per chi volesse semplicemente leggere "qualcosa sui pirati", però da queste righe ho imparato molto sulla società piratesca e sulle cause della sua nascita.
Ciò che mi ha più di tutto incuriosito e spinto a concludere il saggio è la definizione di "proletariato del mare".
Di seguito riporto le righe conclusive di questo libro, nonché quelle che secondo me meglio riassumono i concetti chiave esposti:
"La violenza ci affascina, ma il sangue nasconde l’oro. Amiamo i pirati soprattutto perché erano ribelli. Sfidavano, in un modo o nell’altro, le convenzioni di classe, di razza, di genere e di nazione. Erano poveri e in una condizione miserevole, ma esprimevano grandi ideali. Sfruttati e maltrattati dai capitani mercantili, hanno abolito il salario, istituito una diversa forma di disciplina, messo in pratica una loro visione di democrazia e uguaglianza, fornito un modello alternativo per la conduzione del vascello d’alto mare. All’ombra del Sinistro Mietitore, ne hanno rubato il simbolo e gli hanno riso in faccia. Si sono opposti ai grandi e potenti di quei tempi, e per questo sono diventati i malfattori di tutte le nazioni. Apprezzavano quel ruolo, anche se l’idea di una «vita felice e corta» conteneva una crudele contraddizione. Quanto più i pirati sono riusciti a costruire la loro gaia e autonoma esistenza e a goderne, tanto più le autorità si sono impegnate a distruggerli. Questi fuorilegge hanno vissuto in modo audace e ribelle, e dobbiamo ricordarli almeno finché esisteranno potenti e oppressione da combattere."
Se avessi letto questo libro per scrivere una ricerca accademica, sarei rimasto estremamente soddisfatto proprio grazie alla quantità e alla qualità delle fonti. Purtroppo, però, leggendolo per mera curiosità, a volte mi è risultato eccessivamente ripetitivo e, molto più raramente, quasi noioso per i temi trattati. Sono comunque riuscito a finirlo perché gli spunti di riflessione sono innumerevoli e ogni volta che stavo per abbandonare la lettura, qualche informazione interessante mi riportava tra le pagine del libro.
Non so se lo consiglierei per chi volesse semplicemente leggere "qualcosa sui pirati", però da queste righe ho imparato molto sulla società piratesca e sulle cause della sua nascita.
Ciò che mi ha più di tutto incuriosito e spinto a concludere il saggio è la definizione di "proletariato del mare".
Di seguito riporto le righe conclusive di questo libro, nonché quelle che secondo me meglio riassumono i concetti chiave esposti:
"La violenza ci affascina, ma il sangue nasconde l’oro. Amiamo i pirati soprattutto perché erano ribelli. Sfidavano, in un modo o nell’altro, le convenzioni di classe, di razza, di genere e di nazione. Erano poveri e in una condizione miserevole, ma esprimevano grandi ideali. Sfruttati e maltrattati dai capitani mercantili, hanno abolito il salario, istituito una diversa forma di disciplina, messo in pratica una loro visione di democrazia e uguaglianza, fornito un modello alternativo per la conduzione del vascello d’alto mare. All’ombra del Sinistro Mietitore, ne hanno rubato il simbolo e gli hanno riso in faccia. Si sono opposti ai grandi e potenti di quei tempi, e per questo sono diventati i malfattori di tutte le nazioni. Apprezzavano quel ruolo, anche se l’idea di una «vita felice e corta» conteneva una crudele contraddizione. Quanto più i pirati sono riusciti a costruire la loro gaia e autonoma esistenza e a goderne, tanto più le autorità si sono impegnate a distruggerli. Questi fuorilegge hanno vissuto in modo audace e ribelle, e dobbiamo ricordarli almeno finché esisteranno potenti e oppressione da combattere."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 152 reviews