Thus the same deed might be deemed piracy on one side, and privateering on another. These would be obtained from a European nation authorizing the said activities in its name. 6 ‘Corsairs’ and ‘privateers’ were shipowners who fitted out a vessel with their personal fortune for purposes of carrying out trade and plunder, supported by official licences ( cartas de corso in Spanish). All western European nations with imperial pretensions had their own mercenaries serving them across the oceans. The difference between a ‘corsair’/’privateer’ and a ‘pirate’ is often seen as a subtle one and a matter of positioning only. Unlike Cartagena, Santa Marta was never the object of ex (.)ĦIn many texts of the 20 th and 21 st centuries, the meaning of the Spanish term ‘corsario’ is found to be equivalent to the English one of ‘pirate’, despite the existence of the English words ‘corsair’ and ‘privateer’.
7 Restrepo Tirado, Historia de la provincia.Piracy in the Americas, 1500 – 1750, Armonk, NY: M. Of unstable categories and moral economies of corso and contraband
E SWORD BIBLIOTECA HISPANA FREE
Whether they were free men or slaves, what does their turning to him rather than the governor suggest about the practical modalities of these respective powers in Santa Marta at the time? Were the fugitives aware of the role priests played in the practice of coartaci ón, and also more generally as moral arbiters and if so, did they hope to gain the prelate’s support in their endeavours to (re)gain their freedom? I. At issue here is that the four runaways should seek the bishop’s protection. temporal or ecclesiastical- lay in matters of slavery and status.ĥIn the third line of enquiry, ‘negotiation’ entails analysing the strategy deployed by the fugitives and exploring the ways in which slaves coped with and succeeded in managing their status in eighteenth century Santa Marta and New Granada. That the whole affair was triggered by the flight from the corsair’s ship of several black men seeking refuge with the prelate, demanding recognition of their rights to freedom begs the question of where the final authority –i.e.
It documents attempts made by the bishop and the governor, Don Josef de Andía (in his post from 1726 to 1731), not so much to settle matters by discussion and mutual agreement as to assert rivalling claims to legitimacy in representing the government. Contrary to the usual imbalance found in studies of corsairs, privateers and pirates sailing along the coasts of Nueva Granada and portrayed as attackers and looters 5, this corsair’s story provides a different understanding of corso and shows how its practice revolved around, and contributed to the sustenance of an illegal and necessary local economy in which slaves were a sought-after commodity.ĤThe second line of enquiry relates to ‘negotiation’ between the competing sites of power and authority –secular and religious- in eighteenth century Spanish colonies. It is concerned with the business sense of ‘negotiation’. The first line is historiographical, pertaining to local and wider eighteenth century Caribbean scholarship. 4 Three main lines of enquiry constitute this article, with the notion of ‘negotiation’ running as a guiding thread. Inasmuch as slavery appears as the ‘blind spot’ of Samaria history, unravelling the background to the corsair’s story and his setbacks with the bishop in relation to four African runaways sheds light on this otherwise largely invisible past.