THOMAS HEEBØLL-HOLM (Odense) opened the conference by asking whether the term ‘Criminalizing Economies’ might end up as another ‘fancy word for piracy’. Piracy is a useful short word, but very problematic for the later Middle Ages. Piracy is only the tip of an iceberg of partly deviant, mostly violent-related actions related to the sea (smuggling, reprisals, fraud, conspiracy...). It also is a ‘catch-all-term’ for diverse economic and paralegal enterprises. As core concepts he named 1. A legal pluralism and the legitimate use of violence in a „pre-souverain state“ environment in which individual rights to reprisals existed. 2. ‘Economies’ as economic contexts in which „everything is about the money or acquisition of something“. 3. Maritime space and connectivity: a regulated but hardly controlled space that is competitive regarding connectivity and distribution.

In his own presentation Heebøll-Holm talked about the Hawley brothers who in the 14th century were the nucleus of a ‘privateer consortium’. This he defined as a group formed to undertake business that would exceed the possibilities of each individual member. It consisted of nobles, traders, ship owners and was formed in order to exploit royal privateering licences and to commit piracy. From a chronological perspective, Heebøll-Holm made it clear that the war between France and England was crucial. When it ended, piracy was equated with treason, which was the first criminalization of piracy in Europe. The Hawley example also illustrates how difficult the distinct attribution ‘pirate’ is, as they were much more: traders, smugglers, money lenders, members of parliament, judges etc.

BART LAMBERT (York) focused on who decided on the legitimacy of seizure of goods in the Low Countries in the later Middle Ages. He showed that in this highly commercial region, where maritime plunder threatened profitability, it was the local courts which had higher jurisdiction, where people addressed criminal cases. The Dutch central government seemed to leave this part of jurisdiction to the local courts. In 1480 there was an attempt to establish an admiral as only instance to judge cases of maritime plunder. Lambert hence showed that maritime justice was not only imposed from the top and historians should also look at lower regional levels.

AMÂNDIO BARROS (Porto) presented what he could find out from the rather few documents in Portuguese archives. He explained the power of port cities governed by traders in the Kingdom of Portugal and that the cities would always defend their interests even if this meant confronting the crown. From his point of view the sailors of these cities were all merchants but also pirates or robbers given the opportunity.

TOBIAS DANIELS (Rome) showed results of his research in papal registers for the years 1470-1484. He stressed that the papacy has to be researched much more regarding piracy. The papal state was not only a land power but also a sea power with own ships. Furthermore, the pope was and still is the highest spiritual power in western Europe and Daniels found many supplications to him regarding piracy (‘more piratarum’ was an often used term). The following discussion raised questions about many aspects of papal policies showing the importance of more research. Daniels rightfully emphasized that he only worked on 14 years and therefore most questions need further research.

The discussion following panels 1 and 2 focussed mainly on terminology. Gregor Rohmann pointed out that the lectures so far focussed on piracy, privateering and war, neglecting the legitimate violence of individuals in reprises. It was also stressed that ‘pirate’ is rather a temporary state not a permanent profession. It was also discussed what the sources can tell us and Nikolas Jaspert encouraged to distinguish object language and meta language.

MICHAEL MEICHSNER (Greifswald) presented a case study on the bailiffs on Gotland around 1500. With the background of political struggles between Denmark and Sweden, the bailiffs intensified control over Gotland. Three brothers of the Axelsson Thott family used Gotland very cleverly for their family politics, including violent taking of vessels. Meichsner named several sources, mainly letters, in which the dangers of the ‘utligger’-ships of Gotland are mentioned or complained about. Some also give insight on the difficulty of trading seized goods back into the market and how Gotland at times might have served as a port where this was possible.

KILIAN BAUER (Eichstätt) focused on the legitimate status of utliggers in the Wendish-Danish war. He showed on many examples, that it was between diplomacy and private matter. Cases were objectified between delegates and sometimes solved judicially. The legal status of utliggers seemed to be more precise than a hundred years earlier and it seems like individual liability replaced a collective liability.

In the following panels 3 and 4 it was discussed whether it makes sense to separate North Sea, Atlantic and Mediterranean both spatial and chronological as there was a development and the spaces became continuously connected. It was stressed that there still was a multinormativity and local issues. It was also seen as helpful to compare maritime situations to terrestrial situations and look for analogies for example in violence, feuds, theft, robbery and apply known phenomena to the sea.

CHRISTOPH DARTMANN (Hamburg) talked about the Genoese conquest of Chios in 1346. The involved ships were built and fit out by individuals, not the government. Dartmann showed how this was legitimized in different sources, including the fight against pirates, and explained the underlying political and economic interests, access to mastic and alum among them.

GEORG CHRIST (Manchester) explained how he thinks Venice developed an early form of a „coast guard“ in the 13th and 14th century. Venice’s claim of controlling the Adriatic and its implementation between emperor and pope was the background. This originated from an office against contraband and led to gulf galleys which not only fought contraband but patrolled in the Adriatic. Christ then explained in detail how Venice was able to draw a navy from mainly privately-owned ships following F. C. Lane. He then discussed the fleet’s targets and found that the term ‘pirate’ was mainly used in the context of naval warfare.

PHILIPP HÖHN (Frankfurt am Main) stressed the spatial dimension of the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate economic actions by showing how ideas about economic deviance were used to exclude competing actors from or confine them to certain spaces. Hanse cities coined competing ports as ‚pirate nests‘ or ‚smuggler’s coves‘, while in reality their activities – for example trade with agricultural products and confiscated goods, negotiations about property rights to these goods or about connected political topics – did not differ from those of the Hanse cities. In no way did the incriminated ports constitute ‚pirate heterotopias‘ inhabited by violent perpetrators, but were part of the legal pluralism of that time with law abiding citizens.

GREGOR ROHMANN (Göttingen / Frankfurt am Main) shifted the focus from space to connectivity and showed how Hamburg managed to achieve this quality – which it did not possess from the beginning – by canalising distribution. The city reached for dominance over the Elbe by accusing neighbouring actors along that river of piracy, for example when inhabitants of the riverbanks executed traditional rights like that of ius naufragii (right of shipwreck). But to fight wrecking and smuggling and to collect fees Hamburg acted aggressively itself and used the services of local noblemen who had the reputation of performing wrecking and piracy themselves. Complaints about these noblemen were collected by the Hamburg council, until their services weren’t useful anymore and they could be defeated in just feud.

FREDERIK VOGNSEN HANSEN (Aarhus) questioned two predominant assumptions used to explain medieval piracy in Denmark: a strive for supremacy over the sea that led rulers to cooperate with pirates on the one hand and the existence of ‘illegal markets’ or a ‘pirate economy’ for stolen goods on the other. In medieval sources there is no evidence for the existence of ‘pirate harbours’ and the limited information about where seized goods went suggests that they usually were sold within the regular economy, either at town markets or at noble manors in the countryside. This was facilitated by the legitimising effect of war and feud that allowed to seize ships and goods of conflict parties (and at least to cover seizures against third parties). Thus, in many cases the existence of a black market was not even necessary.

BEATA MOŻEJKO (Gdańsk) described the somewhat erratic course of Gdańsk city councillor and diplomat Bernd Pawests first and only maritime command beyond the Baltic, aboard the huge but dilapidated great caravel Peter von Danzig 1471/72. During the anglo-hanseatic war the modestly experienced commander tried to maneuver between political and propagandistic purposes, military goals, technical difficulties and the material needs of his sailors and mercenaries: Rushed by demands for payment and loot and eager to launch a solo assault instead of waiting for reinforcements from other Hanse cities Pawest cruised the English Channel. But since he failed to attack any English vessels, the Peter von Danzig only managed to seize one French ship before it went hors de combat.

EMILY SOHMER TAI (New York) highlighted the relations between Venetian and Genoese claims of ownership of the Adriatic and the Ligurian sea respectively on one hand and opposition against these claims on the other – especially in the form of contumacy: From the early Middle Ages Venice used accusations of piracy against inhabitants of the Balkan Adriatic coast to legitimize punitive expeditions and to forcefully import manpower, mainly mariners and servants – as slaves before the christianization of the Balkan, afterwards as indentured labourers. By contrast, for Genoa it was more difficult to force its periphery into such a subordinate position, mainly because the town of Savona had the potential to compete with Genoa.

MARIE KELLEHER (Long Beach) discussed the royal Aragonese embargo on trade with Muslim countries using the example of Barcelonas prestigious Marquet family, among whose members were high officials like vice-admirals and successful entrepreneurs as well as smugglers and embargo breakers. Several family members rose to high ranks even after repeatedly being caught violating the embargo, but did not face neither financial nor political consequences. This was only possible, because the crown of Aragon profited more from collecting fines from merchants continuing trade with Muslims than from completely preventing such business and severely punishing involved traders like the Marquets.

Subsequently, MIKE CARR (Edinburgh) shifted the focus to a break in the history of papal embargoes on trade with Muslims after the fall of the last crusader stronghold at Acres in 1291, when the crusading strategy shifted towards naval warfare in the eastern Mediterranean including a stricter enforcement of the trade embargo. The Kingdom of Cyprus, the Knights Hospitaller and the Genoese Zaccaria family ruling Chios became the main enforcers of the embargo since they were not part of larger Mediterranean empires and therefore needed papal support more than other Christian powers in the east (such as for example the Venetians). However, Rhodes – the new Hospitaller headquarters – and Cyprus were used as stopovers by Genoese slave traders on their routes from the Black Sea to the Mamluks and seizures of Genoese ships led to counter-attacks. Venetian merchants by contrast mostly sailed from Greece to Egypt, thus bypassing the conflict zone and profiting from the problems of their Genoese rivals. Finally, when during the 14th century trading restrictions were relaxed through the issuing of papal licences, the former enforcers of the embargo were among the main recipients of these exemptions.

ALBRECHT CORDES (Frankfurt) and NIKOLAS JASPERT (Heidelberg) gave concluding comments on the conference in which Cordes, from his viewpoint as a legal historian, reminded the audience of the difference between the terms ‘illicit’ and ‘illegitimate’ on the one hand and ‘illegal’ on the other hand: The latter requires the existence of laws and implies, that there is also an outside, where these laws don’t apply. Concerning future research, he pointed out that the conditions of maritime labour should be examined, for example methods of recruiting, payment, training.

Jaspert complimented the organizers on their concept of ‘Criminalizing Economies’ which did not reduce the topic to actual acts of violence, but also included the discursive level, like accusations of violence and debates about its legitimacy.

Conference Overview:

The Atlantic:

Thomas Heebøll-Holm (Odense): Prizes, Privateers, and Market in 14th Century England and France

Bart Lambert (York): Navigating Insecurity: The Costs and Benefits of the Privateering Economy in Fifteenth-Century Bruges

Amândio Barros (Porto): ‘Make Good Peace or Total War.’ Trade, Piracy and the Construction of Portugal’s Maritime State in the Later Middle Ages (1350-1550)

Tobias Daniels (Rom): Popes and Pirates: Paul Beneke and the Portinari-Triptych

The Baltic and North Sea:

Philipp Höhn (Frankfurt am Main): Merchant Spaces, Pirate Places? Distribution, Legal Pluralism, and the Construction of Maritime Deviance in the Baltic (14th-16th Centuries)

Gregor Rohmann (Göttingen / Frankfurt am Main): The Emperor, the Pope, and the “Pirates”. How Hamburg gained Control over the Elbe River, 1359-1387

Frederik Vognsen Hansen (Aarhus): Conceptualizing ‘Piracy’ in Late Medieval Denmark

Beata Możejko (Gdańsk): From the Baltic to the North Sea. The Great Caravel “Peter von Danzig” under the Command of Berndt Pawest, Councilor of Gdańsk

Michael Meichsner (Greifswald): Islands and Maritime Conflicts – The Example of Gotland around 1500

Kilian Baur (Eichstätt): Schal men den clageren beyden syden rechtes behelpen – King, Councils, Burghers, and the Juridical Consequences of War

The Mediterranean:

Christoph Dartmann (Hamburg): Naval Warfare in Communal Genoa

Georg Christ (Manchester): Pirates and the Venetian Coast Guard/Navy in the 14th Century

Emily Sohmer Tai (New York): Pirates on the Coast. Littoral Expansion and Maritime Predation in Liguria and Dalmatia, 1300-1500

Marie Kelleher (Long Beach): The Family Business: The Smugglers, Captains, and Councilors of Barcelona’s Marquet Family

Mike Carr (Edinburgh): Policing the Sea. Enforcing the Papal Embargo on Trade with “Infidels”

Albrecht Cordes (Frankfurt am Main) / Nicolas Jaspert (Heidelberg): Comments and Discussion