An important part of eighteenth-century maritime conflict involved the destruction of enemy commerce and the protection of home trade. In performing these tasks, state navies were augmented by privateers, vessels owned, equipped and manned by private individuals authorised by their governments to attack and seize the enemy’s seabourne property. For their reward, the investors and seafarers engaged in privateering ventures shared in the proceeds of any ships and goods taken and condemned as lawful prize. Privateering therefore represented a business opportunity to the maritime community, a chance to acquire instant wealth at the enemy’s expense; at the same time, it appeared as a cheap convenient means by which the state might supplement its naval strength. In this important analysis David J. Starkey draws upon a wealth of documentary evidence to throw fresh light upon the character, scale and significance of the British privateering business.

My thesis examines how the enterprise of British privateering was presented in the British press throughout the eighteenth-century maritime War of Jenkins' Ear, 1739-1748. I plan to argue that Britain presented the enterprise of privateering in a promising light to its own subjects in order to gain greater advantage in the commercial maritime war. I plan to track the reports presented in the press to analyze how effective they were in creating an influential public opinion towards maritime commerce. The merchant class was seeking to flourish commercially during wartime when the opportunity of increasing ones finances was highly probable. My research is centered on the specific sector of the privateering enterprise found within the commercial class and how they were being presented a positive enough view of this particular maritime occupation to encourage investment. Due to the intricate nature of maritime warfare, the study will broach the subjects of international, political and economic affairs. In order to understand how seafarers and the rest of the nation came to terms with the politics that surrounded the maritime war of 1739-1748, my research methodology will rely heavily on reports from British journals and magazines. Ultimately, the purpose of analyzing press reports will be to bridge the connection between commerce, parliament, and the maritime war in order to explain how influential the British press was over its merchant readers.

This is a survey of the voyages of English navigators, from the pioneers of the late 15th century to the scientific expeditions of the early 19th century, not only in South American waters, but also the Caribbean and North America.

Those travelling on the seas have always been vulnerable to the attacks of predators acting within or outside the law. In the 18th and 19th centuries such assaults reached new heights as the development of trans-oceanic empires led to an increase in the wealth and extent of sea-borne trade, and with it the potential for prize-taking.

The story of hugely ambitious and risky long-distance private voyages, only one of which brought huge returns for investors. The three great privateering expeditions into the South Sea, which set out, respectively, in 1703, led by William Dampier; in 1708, led by Woodes Rogers; and in 1719, led by George Shelvocke, were costly and ambitious long distance voyages, carrying great risk for their investors but promising great reward. This book tells the story of the voyages and their impact. It argues that, far from being anachronistic activities more in keeping with an earlier age, as some scholars have asserted, the voyages were significant events and had a huge impact - on politicians, influencing future maritime and naval strategy; on investors, swelling enthusiasm for the South Sea Company which ended in the disastrous Bubble; and in literature, where the narratives of the voyages became an important source for some of the greatest literature of the period, including Robinson Crusoe, Gulliver's Travels and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. The book provides a great deal of original detail about the voyages, including the difficulties of undertaking such lengthy expeditions, unrest among the crews, and financial details of investmentsand returns - and losses. Tim Beattie completed his doctorate at the University of Exeter.

In early modern Britain, there was an argument that war at sea, especially war in Spanish America, was an ideal means of warfare, offering the prospect of rich gains at relatively little cost whilst inflicting considerable damage on enemy financial resources. This book examines that argument, tracing its origin to the glorious memory of Elizabethan maritime war, discussing its supposed economic advantages, and investigating its influence on British politics and naval policy during the War of the Spanish Succession (1702-13) and after. The book reveals that the alleged economic advantages of war at sea were crucial in attracting the support of politicians of different political stances. It shows how supporters of war at sea, both in the government as well as in the opposition, tried to implement pro-maritime war policy by naval operations, colonial expeditions and by legislation, and how their attempts were often frustrated by diplomatic considerations, the incapacity of naval administration, and by conflicting interests between different groups connected to the West Indian colonies and Spanish American trade. It demonstrates how, after the War of the Spanish Succession, arguments for active colonial maritime war continued to be central to political conflict, notably in the opposition propaganda campaigns against the Walpole ministry, culminating in the War of Jenkins's Ear against Spain in 1739. The book also includes material on the South Sea Company, showing how the foundation of this company, later the subject of the notorious 'Bubble', was a logical part of British strategy. Shinsuke Satsuma completed his doctorate in maritime history at the University of Exeter.