Dubious. The more we learn about these pirates, the more it seems that Western European, Christian, sailors sailed on many Barbary Coast pirate ships and were particularly valued by their Arab comrades-in-blood if they brought skills learned in the Caribbean.

The Ottoman Empire was at best lukewarm towards jihad – conversion to Islam in the Ottoman Balkans happened largely in Bosnia and Albania, both difficult borderlands in the struggle between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and in both of which formal Christianity had relatively shallow roots. Bosnia had previously been the heartland of the Bogomils, one of medieval Europe’s more interesting heretical sects.

More firmly Orthodox and Catholic areas remained so with minimal conversion to Islam although some local nobles did and some Muslim Turks emigrated from Anatolia. Millions of these were murdered in the late 19th Century in incidents that were deliberately misreported in the West and are now all but forgotten about; except, of course, by the Turks, which goes along way to explain why they get so touchy when asked to publicly flagellate themselves about the Armenian Genocide.

The North African coast never under more than tenuous Ottoman control, particularly after Ottoman sea power was broken at the battle of Lepanto. And slave raiding was hardly unique to the Arabs at this stage; and nor were religious questions that came with it – many black slaves who ended up in the Americas came from areas which were overwhelmingly Muslim by the 17th Century, yet Islam does not seem to have survived the plantation system, and I would suppose also the virtually enforced illiteracy that came with it.

To be fair, Harry, I suppose it’s probably attractive from someone with your political perspective to read positive messages about GWB’s foreign policy into the history of the Middle East. After all, there’s sod all positive to read into its present.

You are reaching for the name of Stephen Decatur. Crazy name, crazy guy.

The Secretary of the Navy who gave him the task was Jacob Crowninshield.

Decatur’s rival was William Bainbridge.

So, were the barbary pirates essentially a maritime wing of the Ottomans, or did they just have a coincidence of interests?

I caught the Ekin book last autumn: the “out-of-print” status says more about the production-line that is modern publishing than anything else. It didn’t appear on the British lists until some time after its Irish publication.

In my mileage, it isn’t a particularly good book. Its credentials would be improved with a decent index, for a start. It has a good story, but is based on very limited original material. Too much of Ekin’s effort is extrapolation or mere speculation. Apart from the O’Driscoll feuding (what else has remained unchanged in West Cork over four centuries?), he has a nice line in implying that skull-duggery at the highest levels may be behind the Baltimore raid.

As Harry Flashman @ 01:30 AM implies, Giles Milton’s “White Gold” is a better book by far, and based on more solid foundations (it is also clearly the model for Ekin).

Following the erudite Flashman, I have also used (and liked) Frederick C. Leiner’s “The End of Barbery Terror: America’s 1815 War against the Pirates of North Africa” (ISBN 0-19-518994-9). No! Don’t switch off! There’s significant local input and interest herein, too.

It was President Madison (and a government and navy stuffed with Ulster-Scots, mainland Scots and their descendants) who took on the Barbery states, while the British and others were happy to pay the “Danegeld” (Yeah: sound familiar). Space is limited here, but I’ll probably use my blog-site to pursue some loose threads: glad to debate further there.

Oh, and sorry again for coming late to this party.

Nah, I get it now, having finally read it properly.

Skullduggery all round.

Bloody Islamofascists! I’m surprised ATW hasn’t had something to say about this by now.

Posted by GerryOS on Jun 20, 2007 @ 09:56 PM
#

Actually if David Vance did mention it in these terms he wouldn’t be far from the truth, the Barbary pirates were actually the “islamist terrorists” of their day. Unlike the famous pirates of the Caribbean who were solely interested in plunder there was a very strong element of jihad behind the motivation of the Barbary pirates.

It is also interesting how the western powers of the time handled this problem, to the Europeans (chiefly French) the solution was to try diplomatic means, send ambassadors and envoys to the Sultans’ courts and to try buying them off. No prizes for guessing how effective this was.

However when the pirates messed with the ships of the new United States the Americans took a somewhat more robust attitude. They sent a squadron of warships and marines to North Africa and blew the pirates to bits (the second line of the US Marine Corps hymn, “to the shores of Tripoli”), after this the world was no longer plagued by the depredations of the Barbary corsairs.

Plus ca change and all that.

(I recommend Giles Milton’s “White Gold” if you want to learn more about this subject)

Not that it matters that much when you’re being carted off to Tangiers.

The auld O’Driscoll was getting the rent/or had done.

The younger O’Driscolls seem to have been in dispute with him – presumably because of whatever terms he had agreed to allow him to stay in Ireland while they were exiled.. and the land they may have thought of as their inheritance.

And they were, it’s suggested, in contact with pirates.

It could have been intended as a message to him.

I might keep the idea in mind for the first time I get a huge water bill – just sell the nearest seaside village off into slavery. Larne might do.

The younger O’Driscolls – exiled in Spain, angry at their patriarch’s betrayal, and possibly in communication with pirates – may have been another factor in the intrigue. But in one seemingly significant transaction, dated 20th of June 1610, the hapless villagers secured title to their lands at Baltimore on a 21-year lease. It was an agreement that would expire exactly 376 years ago today, the morning the corsairs arrived. [added emphasis]

Almost seems too much of a coincidence..

Yes you should, Pete. You would not want us to rush out and do anything rash.

I did realise that when they are calling you “Ould Osborne” your best harem/galley slave days are probably behind you.

Very interesting accounts of what must have been not only a terrifying but a completely bewildering ordeal.

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/11772

Might be of interest if your tastes lean towards epic adventures against all the odds..

Susan

I suspect the rather mundane, if slightly chilling, reason for that might be a combination of a lack of cargo room and the estimated value of those set ashore.

As well as noting the “Two of Dungarvan” and “One of Dartmouth” also sent ashore the Annals go on to point out

They have taken 9 Portingales, 3 Pallicians, 17 Frenchmen, 9 Englishmen of Dartmouth and 9 from two boats of Dungarvan, 47.

The sum of all captives is 154.

I should probably include that in the original post.

There was a documentary on it, I think on BBC2, about ten years ago.