Who Made the Rules? Governance and Law Among Pirates

The Quartermaster: The Other Power on Deck

If the captain was responsible for leading the ship, the quartermaster could be responsible for looking after the interests of the crew.

This officer is particularly interesting because the position provided a counterbalance to the captain’s authority on some pirate vessels.

The quartermaster’s responsibilities could include supervising provisions, overseeing the distribution of captured goods, settling disagreements, and helping manage the company’s day-to-day business.

In some accounts, the quartermaster had considerable influence over decisions outside battle. He could challenge the captain, represent the crew, and help ensure that the agreed-upon arrangements were followed.

Why was this position so important?

Consider the division of captured cargo. A captain who controlled every part of the process might be tempted to give himself and his favorites the best share. A quartermaster with responsibility for distribution provided another set of eyes—and someone the ordinary sailors could turn to if they believed the arrangement was unfair.

The position helped separate the captain’s command responsibilities from the practical management of the crew’s interests.

Not every pirate ship used the quartermaster in exactly the same way, but the office appears repeatedly in accounts of organized pirate companies. It is one of the clearest examples of how some crews deliberately divided authority rather than placing everything in the hands of a single leader.

Crew Councils: When the Company Had a Voice

On some pirate ships, major questions were brought before the company for discussion.

These gatherings are often described as crew councils or general councils. Rather than leaving every important decision to the captain, the crew could have a say in matters affecting the entire voyage.

Questions might include:

• Which direction should the ship sail?

• Should the crew pursue a particular vessel?

• Is a captured ship worth keeping or stripping for cargo?

• Should the company continue its voyage or divide?

• How should a disagreement between members be resolved?

The details differed between crews, and the historical evidence does not support the idea that every pirate ship held regular democratic meetings. Nevertheless, accounts of certain pirate companies show that collective decision-making was an important part of their organization.

For sailors accustomed to having little control over their working conditions aboard merchant or naval vessels, this arrangement could be attractive.

It also made practical sense. The crew members were the ones taking the risks. They were the ones handling the sails, manning the guns, boarding enemy ships, and spending weeks or months away from shore.

Giving them a voice in decisions could help secure their cooperation.

Of course, having a vote did not mean everyone always agreed. A ship full of armed men with different ambitions and opinions could still have plenty of disagreements. But a council offered a way to settle important questions without relying entirely on the captain’s personal judgment.

Shares, Specialists, and the Business of Running a Ship

A pirate crew needed more than a captain and a quartermaster. Ships depended on people with specialized knowledge, and their agreements often reflected the value of those skills.

A sailing master understood navigation and the handling of the vessel. A carpenter could repair damage to the hull, masts, and other essential structures. A gunner maintained the weapons, while a surgeon or doctor could be invaluable when someone was injured or ill.

These were not interchangeable jobs.

A skilled carpenter could be just as important to the survival of a crew as a man who fought during a boarding action. A damaged ship could not outrun a pursuer, and a poorly maintained vessel might never reach its destination.

The division of captured wealth could recognize these different responsibilities. Some agreements provided larger shares for officers or specialists, while ordinary crew members received an established portion.

The arrangement was not necessarily equal in the modern sense. Instead, it was a negotiated system that assigned value to different roles and responsibilities.

Some pirate agreements also included provisions for sailors injured while serving the company. Compensation for the loss of a limb or other serious injury helped recognize that a wounded sailor might no longer be able to perform the work expected of him.

These provisions are particularly revealing. They show that certain crews were thinking beyond the immediate division of captured goods and considering what might happen if someone was permanently injured during a voyage.

For a sailor who had little security in ordinary maritime employment, that could be a meaningful consideration.

Was Pirate Government Really Democratic?

It is tempting to describe pirate ships as floating democracies, especially when reading about elected captains, crew votes, and shared agreements.

There is some truth behind that description, but it needs a little context.

Some Golden Age pirate crews did practice forms of collective decision-making that were unusual compared with the strict hierarchy of naval vessels. They could limit a captain’s authority, give crew members a voice, and establish rules through agreements.

But that does not mean pirate society was an equal or universally democratic system.

Different crews followed different arrangements. Some gave their captains more authority than others. The rights described in surviving articles were not necessarily extended to every person aboard, and the phrase “every man has a vote” should not be confused with universal equality.

The evidence is also uneven. Historians often rely on trial testimony, contemporary accounts, and published descriptions of pirate articles. These sources provide valuable information, but they do not give us a complete record of how every crew made decisions.

Historian Nathan T. Jopling, for example, has emphasized that pirate and privateering groups between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were not all part of one consistent democratic tradition. Their practices varied according to their circumstances and the period in which they operated.

The most accurate conclusion is that some pirate crews developed distinctive systems of shared authority and agreed rules. Others were more hierarchical. There was no single pirate constitution governing the entire Golden Age of Piracy.

Why Rules Mattered to Pirates

For all the adventure associated with pirate life, a ship was an extremely difficult place to live and work.

The crew shared limited space, food, fresh water, equipment, and sleeping quarters. They depended on one another to keep the vessel moving and to survive storms, disease, and encounters with enemy ships.

A disagreement over supplies or captured cargo could threaten the success of an entire voyage. A captain who ignored the crew’s interests might find himself without their support. A sailor who refused to perform an essential task could put everyone in danger.

Rules helped establish expectations before these problems arose.

They also helped create a sense of shared responsibility. A crew member knew what he was entitled to receive, what work he was expected to perform, and what authority different officers held.

Pirates may have rejected the laws of the governments that hunted them, but many still understood that a functioning ship required organization.

The sea did not reward chaos. It rewarded preparation, cooperation, and a crew capable of working together when conditions turned dangerous.

A Floating Government on the High Seas

The idea of pirate governance reveals a side of maritime history that often gets overlooked.

Behind the flags, cannons, and famous captains were carefully negotiated arrangements that helped some crews manage their ships and their lives. Articles of agreement established expectations, officers divided responsibilities, and crew councils gave members a voice in decisions that affected their future.

It was not a perfect system, and it certainly did not make piracy lawful or peaceful. But it was an interesting example of how people outside traditional institutions created their own structures of authority.

The next time you picture a pirate captain standing at the helm, remember that he may not have been the only person making decisions aboard that ship. Somewhere nearby could have been a quartermaster keeping an eye on the stores, a sailing master studying the horizon, and a crew with opinions about where they were headed next.

Even pirates needed someone to keep the books, settle the arguments, and make sure the captain didn’t get too big for his boots.

Set Sail with the Bilge Rat Pirate Adventurer Series

The world of pirate history was about much more than treasure and sword fights. It was a world of complicated alliances, competing ambitions, shipboard responsibilities, and men trying to survive in a dangerous age.

Kevin C. Smith’s Bilge Rat Pirate Adventurer Series brings readers into that world through the adventures of William “Echo” Bilge, following his journey through the dangers and discoveries of pirate life.

Explore all four adventures, or experience the complete voyage in the Compilation Book, featuring all four novels together.

Discover the series at https://pirate-tale.com.