Talk:Pirate code

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Piracy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article lies in the latitude of WikiProject Piracy, a crew of scurvy editors bound to sharpen up all Wikipedia's piracy-related articles. If you want to ship with us and help improve this and other Piracy-related articles, lay aboard the project page and sign on for a berth.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Morgan's articles?[edit]

I know that somewhere here were Morgan's articles, those that Exquemelin wrote in his book. Where are they now? (talk) 11:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


This article should be renamed "Pirate articles" or "Articles of piracy." At no time did the pirates refer to their articles as a "code"; the idea of a "code" comes from the movie Pirates of the Caribbean, not from history. Furthermore, the idea that these three sets of articles sprang from some original code invented jointly by Roberts and Morgan is impossible. Roberts was six years old when Morgan died. --Pirate Dan 04:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree somewhat with that, except the fact that Articles of Piracy and Pirate Articles are also related to official memoradums and laws passed regarding Piracy, maybe another title would be apropriate?--Sharz 12:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I think a move is absolutely needed - real-world facts should not be recorded under a name purely from fiction (though the reverse would be acceptable). Would 'Articles of Agreement' be acceptable? That seems to be the name given most prominently in the article itself. TSP 22:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion the title should include the word "pirate". "Articles of Agreement" is ambiguous out of context (the context being the whole encyclopedia). Does anyone like "Pirate law"? The only problem I see with that is that it could also refer to national laws (British etc.) governing the treatment of pirates. MagnesianPhoenix (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Morgan and Roberts[edit]

The Movie don't say that the Code was invented By Henry Morgan and Bartholomew Roberts, it was only said thtit was made by the "Pirates Morgan and Bartholomew". However, Henry Morgan had two contemporary pirates named Bartholomew (Bartolomeo Portugues & Bartholomew Sharp) and a pirate called Kasper (or Casper) Morgan was active on Madagascar in the days of Roberts, so the Code could have been invented two real-life pirates with this names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 07:55, 27 April 2007

True, the actual movie line only says "Morgan and Bartholomew." The article has claimed that "Bartholomew" was Roberts and that "Morgan" was Henry since before I started editing it, but that may just be the supposition of the writer. Do the Pirates of the Caribbean books say anything more detailed about it?
You're right that Portugues and Sharp were both contemporaries of Morgan. On the other hand, I'm unfamiliar with this Casper/Kasper Morgan, and I don't see anything about any pirate with that name on the Net. But I'd agree to changing the article to reflect the possibility that the movie is referring to Portugues or Sharp. Pirate Dan 13:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

"Robert Bartholomew" needs to be changed to Bartholomew Roberts by someone who is allowed to edit this page. (talk) 21:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The article gives "one of the best known sets of pirate articles" as "set down by the famous Portuguese pirate Bartholomeu Português in 1720." But Bartolomeo Portugues was long since dead in 1720, while Bartholomew Roberts did set his articles in 1720. Either the name or the date must be wrong (I don't know which).Corinius (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Merging pages[edit]

I would advocate keeping two separate pages, with Pirate code of the Brethren being devoted to the fictional code of Pirates of the Caribbean, and the historical pirate articles being moved over to, and integrated with, the Articles of Agreement page. The current arrangement of referring to real articles by a fictional name is awkward and potentially confusing. Pirate Dan 13:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say that I'm very much in favour of merging these two articles, in this way more can be added to a central article. Beyond this, it would be easier to explain the differance to responders, rather than having two conflicting articles, you would have one that flowed. If you don't object to this reasoning I will conduct the merge. --Sharz 23:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not a life and death issue, so far as I'm concerned. I think we can make the articles good whether they're merged or separate. I have no objection to your proceeding to the merge. Pirate Dan 02:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Okay so I'll conduct the merge sometime this week, please review it once done. --Sharz 09:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The section on "Traditional Pirate Articles" needs redoing. There's definitely no need for the articles themselves, since they simply repeat Bartholomew Roberts' articles with rather less detail and accuracy. The introductory material about the Charter Party and Chasse Partie is accurate, and valuable; I will integrate it into the section on "Historical articles of piracy."
The part about swearing to the articles on the Bible is well supported, but the alternative of crossed swords, crossed pistols, or a human skull is unfamiliar to me. Where's it come from? There are a lot of unsupported pirate legends out there.
I'll wait a little bit to see about the evidence on skulls, pistols, and swords before editing the article. Pirate Dan 18:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've looked around the Net and found the story about crossed pistols, crossed swords, and a human skull repeated several times, including by Cindy Vallar, who has at least some idea what she's talking about. I'm still personally skeptical about the tale, as I see no reference back to any primary source, or even a secondary print source, that would bear it out. But it has enough support that I think it should be at least acknowledged in the article. Will be editing shortly. Pirate Dan 13:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Pirates of the Caribbean[edit]

I think two of the statements we now have about the movies' "Pirate Code" are questionable.

One, I'm almost certain I heard Barbossa (or somebody) say that the gathering of the Pirate Lords in POTC: At World's End was the fourth meeting of the Brethren Court, not the second.

Two, while Barbossa did maroon Jack with a pistol and one shot, I don't recall any reference to that being part of the movie code (although it was included in some historical pirate articles).

Pirate Dan 13:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, now someone's saying it's the fifth meeting, not the second or the fourth. I'll see if the script is on line somewhere. - - Pirate Dan 13:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It was the fourth, but that whole paragraph is beside the point anyway. The circumstances of Elizabeth's election are not directly related to the pirate code. 23:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

For reference only:-

the Disney movie trilogy Pirates of the Caribbean, all the featured pirates are governed by a single Code. It is formally known as the "Pirata Codex". This Code extends to pirates worldwide, or at least to all areas under the governance of the nine Pirate Lords. The Code applies both to living pirates and to undead ones. While the Code has the force of law in Shipwreck Cove, where a codex containing the complete code is kept under the care of Captain Teague, elsewhere, the Code is treated more as a set of guidelines than as actual rules. The Code was devised by the pirates "Morgan and Bartholomew."   Although the Code has many other tenets, only five of its provisions are revealed in the course of the trilogy. These are:

  • The right to declare parley, in which the person who declared it is to be taken to the enemy captain for negotiations and is to remain unharmed by his crew until such time. (Although it is supposedly of French derivation and is pronounced "par-LAY," the code spells it as "parlay" as opposed to an orthodox French spelling)
  • Mutiny against the captain of a pirate ship is an unthinkable crime: "the deepest circle of hell is reserved for betrayers and mutineers"
  • He who falls behind is left behind.
  • Only the Pirate King has the power to declare war and during the war, only the Pirate King has the right to declare parlay.
  • The Pirate King is elected by the nine Pirate Lords, with a plurality necessary for election. Anyone caught bribing are to be shot.

  Possible provisions. These provisions or sayings are mentioned, but not stated as definite parts of the code:  

  1. Take what you can, give nothing back.
  2. A marooned pirate is given a pistol with a single shot with which to kill themself as opposed to starvation.

  The Pirate Code was spoken of many times during the film Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, which used parley as a running joke through the film.   Jack Sparrow mentions "Fight to run away" being one of the oldest traditions in piracy. It is unknown if this is a provision.   An account of the code can be found in The Pirates' Code Guidelines, published by Disney Editions under the name of Joshamee Gibbs, one of the characters from the film.

QuentinUK (talk) 23:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

not a potc historical impossibility...[edit]

in pirates of the carribean they did indeed mean henry morgan and black bart,but is it not possible that morgan made a version of the code to which bart adde at an older age?i believe it that way.just a thought to chew on... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 14:28, 10 July 2007

Is this sentence damaged by copy & paste?[edit]

And if not, what does it mean?

"If any time we shall meet another Marooner that Man shall sign his Articles without the Consent of our Company, shall suffer such Punishment as the Captain and Company shall think fit." -- (talk) 00:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

It is confusing due to antiquated grammar and the definition of marooner. Here, I think it means "pirate" and has nothing to do with marooning. The article means, If we encounter other pirates, any of our crew who signs their articles (and thus pledges allegiance to them) shall suffer whatever punishment our captain and company think is appropriate. MagnesianPhoenix (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Original text vs. description[edit]

Can anyone ascertain the sources of the given articles? Some of it seems to be the original text used by the pirates, but some of it is written in the past tense and/or third person. Even so, the latter still uses some outdated language. I am hoping someone can clear this up. MagnesianPhoenix (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pirate code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:57, 18 February 2016 (UTC)