Jolly Roger origins

[Red James Cash]

Didn't say or mean that,I just don't trust courts.I would be less inclined to trust them 300 years ago.If the courts do not know facts usually they are fabricated,that habit was probably much worse 300 years ago.John Quelch flew the flag of saint george,he also always flew the union jack.Heres a coincidence for you.John Quelches base of operations was in Marblehead Mass.William Teaches favorite place to hang out was Marblehead Mass.I was born and grew up in Marblehead Mass.My ancestors always lived in Marblehead Mass.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[MiddenMonster]

Didn't say or mean that,I just don't trust courts.I would be less inclined to trust them 300 years ago.If the courts do not know facts usually they are fabricated,that habit was probably much worse 300 years ago.John Quelch flew the flag of saint george,he also always flew the union jack.Heres a coincidence for you.John Quelches base of operations was in Marblehead Mass.William Teaches favorite place to hang out was Marblehead Mass.I was born and grew up in Marblehead Mass.My ancestors always lived in Marblehead Mass.

Then, specifically, how could a trial transcript from 1702 contain a description of a flag attributed to Quelch if it wasn't Blackbeard's flag until at least 14 years later? I can understand that Blackbeard may have popularized the flag in such a way that in modern times it is associated with him--like "Hound Dog" is associated with Elvis Presley and not Big Mama Thornton. But if Quelch used the flag more than a decade earlier, Blackbeard would have had to, shall we say, pirated the flag...kind of like an early instance of cultural appropriation.

 

[Red James Cash]

That's the problem,Quelch never used the flag.he strictly flew the st George and the jack.Thats what his crew told the court.

 

[grossmusic]

The Blackbeard/Quelch debate just proves my point about facts unchallenged. Very interesting.

MERRY CHRISTMAS, all!

 

[xaos]

That's the problem,Quelch never used the flag.he strictly flew the st George and the jack.Thats what his crew told the court.

Sorry, but the Court transcript was provided and referenced in the previous post.

In the transcript, the crew (who had turned as evidence against Quelch) describes the flag used when attacking. How would the crew so distinctly describe such an unusual flag?

In 1694, English Admiralty directed all privateers to fly the "Red jack" in addition to the flag of St George. (1)

Quelch was not attacking the enemies of Britain as required by license, but the Portuguese who were allies. This is why he flew his own version, the Old Roger.

John Quelches base of operations was in Marblehead Mass.William Teaches favorite place to hang out was Marblehead Mass.

As you noted, Quelch and Teach were in the same location, Teach's 'flag' shows up over 12 years later as the same as described by the Quelch crew in Court, yet there is no connection?

(1) Quelch's Gold: Piracy, Greed, and Betrayal in Colonial New England

 

[MiddenMonster]

That's the problem,Quelch never used the flag.he strictly flew the st George and the jack.Thats what his crew told the court.

That begs the question; why would a court record from 1702 document a detailed description of a flag that Quelch supposedly "never used", and predated the time when Blackbeard could have used a flag of the same description? If the description of the flag is extant with the court record, what purpose did it serve if Quelch never used the flag? And if the description of the flag was added to the court record after the fact, what purpose would that serve?

 

[xaos]

simple, Teach was a poser! From what I have been able to gather, Quench, Bellamy and Teach all used this or a similar design of this flag to attack, perhaps flying the Marblehead boys club flag? (sorry Tam, no reference)

The Quench trial was one of the first under the 1698 Piracy Act, extended with the 1700 statute. This enabled admirals to hold a court session, and to hear the trials of pirates in any place they deemed necessary, rather than requiring that the trial be held in England.
The trial was publicized as the first outside of Britain, but also by Britain as an example, in the attempt to quell their allies the Portuguese. Thus, the trial record had more exposure than what would be your average admiralty trial, and reportedly, the first trial of Judicial Murder in America.
Note: Both Larimore and Quench were targeting the Portuguese. Larimore was captured first, before Quench, but due to his service against the French and Spanish, was returned to England, and acquitted of the offenses against the Portuguese. Quench was made the example. Given the heightened exposure of this trial, I would assume it was extra detailed, and accurately recorded

This act was built upon, and to make corrections to the Offences at Sea Act of 1536, which provided the death penalty for piracy offenses. (which 1536 act itself, was not appealed in its entirety until 1967!)

This statute also added the offence of being an accessory to piracy. Under the 1700 statute, any individual who may “knowingly or willingly … aid and assist, or maintain, procure, command, counsel, or advise” and persons to commit any act of piracy “shall be deemed and adjudged to be accessory to such piracy”. This title of accessory was also extended to any persons who “receive, entertain, or conceal any such pirate or robber”
These accessories “shall be enquired of, tried, heard, determined, and adjudged” following the statute of 1536 by Henry VIII and “shall suffer such pains of death” just as the pirates themselves would.

The majority of the cases tried under these admiralty courts followed the exact proceedings laid out in the 1700 statute. In addition, most pirates appeared to have been given a fair trial because, if the accused could not be confirmed to have taken part in the said piracy by witness testimony, they were often acquitted. However, in the admiralty court, murder was almost always considered the more serious charge. (1)

Hence the willingness of the crew to turn states evidence, and certainly expond on the use of the Old Roger, rather than flying the British standard.

It was not until the Piracy Act of 1837, that the death penalty was abolished for acts of Piracy.

(1) Piracy Act of 1698
(2) Offences of the Sea Act 1536

 

[Red James Cash]

simple, Teach was a poser!

Yup a man who died in battle was a poser LMBO.

 

[A2coins]

Always learning something cool on this site

 

[MiddenMonster]

Yup a man who died in battle was a poser LMBO.

I guess I am either not being clear, or not asking the right questions. So let's change the structure of the equation: If you are attributing to Blackbeard the use of the flag depicting "ornamented anatomy with an hourglass in one hand, a dart in a heart with 3 drops of blood proceeding from it in the other", and also asserting that "Quelch never used the flag", how do you explain the 1702 court record that says otherwise? I understand that you don't trust courts, now or then. But by what mechanism did that description enter into the official record, and when?

 

[Red James Cash]

Let's turn it around,how do you explain that they're there if neither the governer or the prosecuter mention Quelchs colors that he flew.It works both ways.

 

[Red James Cash]

Also let's see some of the original transcripts written in old English instead of the bastarized versions that were rewritten.

 

[MiddenMonster]

Let's turn it around,how do you explain that they're there if neither the governer or the prosecuter mention Quelchs colors that he flew.It works both ways.

OK, I'll play. Even though I think this is an evasive tactic. As xaos pointed out, "In the transcript, the crew (who had turned as evidence against Quelch) describes the flag used when attacking." He cited the source, and I have no reason to believe it is not accurate. If you believe the transcript is inaccurate, it is incumbent on you to demonstrate what you believe those inaccuracies to be, and provide evidence to support that belief. So with that in mind, I ask again:

If you are attributing to Blackbeard the use of the flag depicting "ornamented anatomy with an hourglass in one hand, a dart in a heart with 3 drops of blood proceeding from it in the other", and also asserting that "Quelch never used the flag", how do you explain the 1702 court record that says otherwise? I understand that you don't trust courts, now or then. But by what mechanism did that description enter into the official record, and when?

 

[xaos]

Let's turn it around,how do you explain that they're there if neither the governer or the prosecuter mention Quelchs colors that he flew.It works both ways.

You have proof of this statement?

I provided the Court transcript which detailed the flag.

Also let's see some of the original transcripts written in old English instead of the bastarized versions that were rewritten.

This was 1700's in America, not 1500's in England.

What exactly would be the purpose of re-writing the Court transcript and adding a description of the flag?

 

[MiddenMonster]

And the winner, by technical knockout is...John Quelch.

 

[ivan salis]

the skull and crossed bones were often used on catholic grave stones and at bottom of crucifix's --as a symbol of Christ "victory" over death --and the believers in Christ would like wise defeat death via going to heaven to live forever