In the comments to a post at AVI's that began with an interesting character, I noted that pirates were pretty common among the English gentry of the era: "The English Civil War and its echoes also turned many adventurers into outlaws on Britain's wide frontier."
That turns out to be exactly what happened in this case. A Roman Catholic who converted to Anglicanism for political reasons under Charles I, he returned to Catholicism during his grief over the death of his wife. A successful privateer defending England's interests before the Civil War, he ended up in exile during the war; fought and won a duel against a French nobleman; became an emissary to the Pope for Oliver Cromwell; and after the Restoration, a popular figure at Charles II's court. He also developed a better wine-bottle than had existed before his time, stronger and tinted to protect the wine from the effects of sunlight.
One of his most famous philosophical/medical attempts was the powder of sympathy. As noted in the post I wrote about "Empathy vs. Sympathy," this was the original use of the term sympathy in English: sympathetic magic, we would call it today.
4 comments:
Why does everyone want to call privateers "pirates"? I guess privateer isn't sexy enough? "Privateer and philosopher" doesn't have quite the romantic ring of "pirate and philosopher," but as far as I can see the man stayed within the bounds of the law in his naval activities. But anyway, Arrr!
Very interesting man, too! I'll have to read more about him.
- Tom
I'm guessing people assume their audience won't know "privateer" and will be confused. Everyone knows "pirate."
It's not that far off, anyway; it's exactly the same activity, just with State blessing. And why should that matter, morally? It just means you have some safe ports and a reliable place to sell your prizes, pragmatically. There's no moral difference in the activity. As the pirate said to Alexander the Great when asked how he dared molest shipping, "How dare you molest the whole world?"
Ah, yeah that's probably the explanation.
As for the moral difference, aren't most things like that? Murder and justifiable homicide are the same action as well.
There’s a substantial moral difference in that example that would exist even if the State did not. It’s not mere legality that makes one better.
Post a Comment