Table of Contents
In the spring of 1699, two men sat down at a table in a rough outpost on the edge of Madagascar and signed their names — one of them by making his mark — to a document that would bind their fortunes together. Three witnesses watched. The agreement was plain, slightly misspelled, and entirely serious: it concerned who would inherit whose gold when one of them died. It was a matelotage contract, and it is one of the very few surviving written records of a practice historians believe was widespread across the pirate world of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
Matelotage — the formal partnership between two male pirates or buccaneers — sits at a complex intersection of economic necessity, social bonding, and, for many scholars, same-sex intimacy. It is among the most fascinating and underreported aspects of the Golden Age of Piracy. This post traces its origins through the primary sources, examines the evidence for its many forms, and explores what matelotage reveals about pirate society — and about the enduring human need for loyalty, recognised partnership, and care.
The World That Created Matelotage: Foundation and Context
To understand matelotage, you first need to understand the world that produced it. The Golden Age of Piracy — broadly spanning from roughly 1650 to 1730 — was an era when European imperial rivalry in the Atlantic and Caribbean created an unstable frontier. Pirates and buccaneers, drawn largely from English, French, Dutch, and Irish maritime communities, operated in spaces that lay far beyond the reach of conventional law and social structures.
The word matelotage derives from the French matelot, meaning sailor or seaman. Historians trace its emergence to the 1620s and 1640s, particularly among the buccaneers of Hispaniola and the pirate haven of Tortuga — a small island off the northwest coast of Hispaniola that became a notorious sanctuary for pirates and privateers. Remarkably, the familiar English word “matey” almost certainly shares the same linguistic root, making it a fossil of an institution that mainstream history has largely forgotten.
Pirate ships were overwhelmingly male environments. Crews lived in extraordinarily close quarters for months at a time, sleeping in narrow hammocks, sharing every meal, facing death together in battle, and spending long stretches with no contact with family ashore. Many of the men who turned to piracy came from the lowest rungs of European society — dispossessed sailors, escaped indentured servants, and men with little stake in the lawful world. Into this environment, matelotage offered something straightforward and vital: a trusted partner with a formal, recognised claim on your wellbeing.
At its most fundamental level, matelotage began as a financial arrangement. Life at sea was brutal and short, and men needed a way to ensure their possessions and share of plunder reached someone they trusted when they died. Economist Peter T. Leeson, in his landmark study The Invisible Hook (2009), explains that this typically meant the surviving partner inherited the other’s wealth, with some portion set aside for the deceased’s family on land. Some historians describe the arrangement as a kind of informal will — legally thin by the standards of the time, but recognised and respected within pirate communities that had their own codes of conduct.
On land, the situation was very different. In seventeenth-century England, France, and the Netherlands, sodomy — broadly defined to include male same-sex acts — was a crime carrying penalties up to and including death. The sea represented a zone where those laws were nearly impossible to enforce, and where different social arrangements could take root undisturbed. Matelotage was, among other things, a product of that distance from conventional authority.
💬 “The word ‘matey’ — that most stereotypical of pirate greetings — almost certainly shares its root with matelotage, making it a linguistic fossil of one of history’s most intimate and least remembered institutions.”
More Than a Contract: The Central Argument About Matelotage
The question historians have debated for decades is deceptively simple: was matelotage ever more than a financial arrangement between two men?
The answer, most scholars now agree, is that matelotage covered a broad spectrum of relationships. Some partnerships were purely economic — mutual risk-pooling between men who needed a trusted beneficiary. Others were deeply fraternal, more like the bond between sworn brothers than anything recognisably romantic. And others, by the available evidence, were romantic and sexual relationships between men who had found in each other something the wider world denied them.
Barry Richard Burg’s landmark 1984 study Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition made the most forceful case for matelotage as a sexual institution. Burg argued that it was not a fringe occurrence but a structural feature of buccaneer culture — what he described as an arrangement generating an “inviolate attachment” with a “sacrosanct aura” that the wider pirate community recognised and respected. For Burg, the institution was inseparable from the sexual culture of the all-male maritime world.
Not all scholars accepted this reading. Hans Turley, writing in Rum, Sodomy and the Lash (1999), urged caution about projecting modern sexual categories onto seventeenth-century men. Turley argued that many apparent signs of romance in pirate partnerships should be read through the lens of early modern homosocial friendship — deep, loyal, emotionally significant, and publicly recognised, but not necessarily sexual in a way that maps cleanly onto contemporary identity categories. His warning against anachronism is important: assuming that all close male partnerships were sexual, or that none were, both distort the historical record equally.
What the evidence establishes beyond reasonable dispute is that matelotage carried genuine social weight. Captains recognised it, crews respected it, and colonial governors felt compelled to suppress it.
📌 KEY INSIGHT
In 1645, Governor Jean Le Vasseur of Tortuga formally requested that France ship approximately 2,000 women to the Caribbean colony with the explicit aim of breaking up matelotage partnerships. The plan failed entirely. Rather than replacing their existing bonds, many pirates took wives and then continued their matelotage relationships alongside the marriages, absorbing the new arrivals into an already-established social unit. The institution survived not because women were unavailable, but because it met needs a wife did not automatically replace.
The failure of Le Vasseur’s intervention is, in fact, one of the most revealing pieces of evidence in the entire matelotage record. It demonstrates that the practice was not simply a product of female absence. It was valued, deliberately maintained, and sufficiently important to pirates that no external intervention could simply dissolve it.
The Evidence and Timeline: A Record That History Almost Lost
Direct documentation of matelotage is scarce, which makes the evidence that does survive extraordinarily valuable.
TIMELINE — Key Moments in the History of Matelotage
| Year | Event |
|---|---|
| c. 1620s–1640s | Matelotage emerges among French buccaneers in Hispaniola and Tortuga |
| 1645 | Governor Le Vasseur requests 2,000 women from France to suppress matelotage on Tortuga; the plan fails |
| 1678 | Alexander Exquemelin publishes The Buccaneers of America — an eyewitness account describing buccaneer partnerships from firsthand experience |
| 1698–1699 | Pirate Robert Culliford and John Swann are documented living together after meeting in prison; Francis Reed and John Beavis sign a formal matelotage contract at Port Dolphin, Madagascar |
| 1724 | Charles Johnson’s A General History of the Most Notorious Pyrates documents pirate relationships and hints at intimacy between Anne Bonny and Mary Read |
| 1832 | Édouard Corbière’s novel Le Négrier offers the first literary account of matelotage from a former French navy sailor’s perspective |
| 1984 | Barry Richard Burg publishes Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition, the first major academic argument for matelotage as a sexual institution |
| 1999 | Hans Turley’s Rum, Sodomy and the Lash introduces more cautious, contextually grounded analysis |
| 2009 | Peter T. Leeson’s The Invisible Hook analyses matelotage through a rational-choice economic lens |
| 2022–2023 | HBO Max’s Our Flag Means Death brings matelotage to mainstream popular attention |
| 2025 | A peer-reviewed article in Law and Humanities analyses the 1699 Reed/Beavis contract as a legally significant “queer contract” with early modern precedents |
The 1699 agreement between Francis Reed and John Beavis — preserved in E.T. Fox’s doctoral study of pirate articles — is among the most compelling documents in the field. It records the men entering what it calls a “consortship,” pledging that any gold, silver, or other possessions would pass to the survivor in the event of a sudden death. The document was signed and sealed before witnesses, giving it the formal character of a legal declaration.
Alexander Exquemelin’s eyewitness account, first published in Dutch in 1678, is the foundational primary source for buccaneer customs. A surgeon who sailed with Henry Morgan’s crew in the Caribbean, Exquemelin wrote that buccaneers lived in small groups — often of two to five men — many of them in matelotage unions. His credibility as a direct participant, rather than a mainland observer, gives his account unusual authority.
The French buccaneer Louis le Golif and his matelot Pulverin offer one of the most human examples on record. Accounts from the period describe how, when Le Golif took a wife, Pulverin’s devastation went far beyond the economic consequences of losing a shared inheritance. Contemporary testimony suggests that Le Golif himself grieved more intensely over the subsequent loss of Pulverin than over the violent death of his wife — a detail that speaks to the depth of attachment these partnerships could reach, whatever their precise nature.
What Matelotage Tells Us: Practical Implications for History
Matelotage matters well beyond being a historical curiosity. It asks us to rethink several assumptions about the past — and about the social structures that humans build when official institutions fail them.
It complicates the image of the lone pirate. The romantic figure of the solitary outlaw sailing against the world conceals a reality in which pirate society was highly social, contractual, and interdependent. Matelotage was one expression of a broader pirate tendency to formalise relationships — to write articles of partnership, distribute plunder by agreed rules, and care for injured crew members through something resembling collective insurance. Pirates were not anarchists; they were pragmatic social architects building institutions suited to conditions on the frontier of empire.
Matelotage also occupies a significant place in the longer history of same-sex partnerships. It demonstrates that publicly recognised, formally structured bonds between two men — bonds that carried legal weight within their community — existed in at least some Atlantic societies well before the twentieth century. This is not a matter of projecting modern identity categories backward. It is simply an observation that the human desire for recognised partnership expressed itself in many forms across many communities throughout history, and matelotage is one of the clearest early modern examples.
The institution also reveals the limits of colonial control. France could legislate against same-sex behaviour, appoint governors hostile to matelotage, and ship hundreds of women across the Atlantic to redirect desire — and still the partnerships persisted. What this tells historians is that matelotage was not merely a product of circumstance. It was actively chosen, deliberately maintained, and central enough to pirate identity that external pressure could not dissolve it.
💬 “Pirates were not simply outlaws; they were institution-builders. Among the institutions they built was a formalised system of partnership that offered loyalty, security, and recognition to men the wider world had already cast out.”
The structural logic of matelotage — two people pledging mutual care and inheritance before witnesses — is recognisable across very different historical contexts. Historians who note its resemblance to a civil partnership are not wrong, but they must approach that comparison with care. What mattered to the men who signed these contracts was not how their bonds would look to future observers, but what those bonds could do for them in their own time and place.
Nuances, Counterpoints, and What History Cannot Settle
History is rarely as tidy as a good story demands, and matelotage presents several unresolved complexities.
The most persistent scholarly dispute concerns the nature of the relationships themselves. Burg’s case that matelotage was primarily sexual rests largely on inference — on the logic of what men in isolated, all-male environments most plausibly did. Turley and others counter that applying the word “sexual” to a seventeenth-century relationship requires evidence, not inference, and that the surviving documentation speaks a language of economic obligation rather than erotic desire. Both positions are defensible; neither is definitive.
A 2025 paper in Law and Humanities navigates this impasse by reframing the question entirely. Rather than asking whether matelots had sex, the paper’s author analyses what the contracts themselves did — how they created recognised, legally-structured obligations of care and mutual inheritance between two men, connecting pirate practice to a broader Atlantic tradition of contractual intimacy that predates and postdates the Golden Age of Piracy. This approach shifts the debate from intention to function, and from identity to institution.
The problem of documentation remains acute. Pirates rarely kept diaries, and colonial records were produced by authorities who were hostile to piracy and to any behaviour they considered morally deviant. The near-silence of the official record on romantic matelotage may reflect the hostility of record-keepers as much as the rarity of the relationships themselves.
In popular culture, the queer pirate has become a vivid and beloved figure. Black Sails (2014–2017) presented its protagonist Captain Flint as canonically bisexual, and Our Flag Means Death (2022–2023) built an entire romantic comedy around two historical pirates in what its creator explicitly linked to the matelotage tradition. These portrayals are creative interpretations rather than historical reconstructions — but creator David Jenkins has publicly credited matelotage as a key historical fact that shaped his vision of pirate life as genuinely “queer-positive.” Popular culture and academic scholarship are, in this unusual case, broadly pointing in the same direction.
Conclusion
Matelotage reminds us that human beings have always found ways to formalise their most important bonds — even, and perhaps especially, in the most lawless circumstances. At the edges of empire, on the decks of buccaneer vessels and in the rough ports of Tortuga and Madagascar, men created matelotage partnerships that provided what the respectable world ashore denied them: recognition, economic security, and mutual loyalty.
Whether every matelotage was romantic is a question history cannot definitively answer. What is clear is that the institution was real, widespread, taken seriously, and meaningful to those who practised it. The 1699 contract between Francis Reed and John Beavis — two ordinary men on the margins of the early modern world — is not merely a legal curiosity. It is a document about care: about deciding that another person’s life and future is worth protecting with your own name and your own possessions.
The next time someone says “matey,” they are, entirely without knowing it, reaching back to this history. That piracy’s most iconic word carries the echo of its most intimate institution seems, on reflection, entirely fitting.
🔑 KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Matelotage was a formal partnership between two male pirates, originating among Caribbean buccaneers in the 1620s–1640s; it combined economic, social, and — in many cases — deeply personal functions in a single recognised bond.
- The word shares its root with “matey”: both derive from the French matelot (sailor), giving the most common pirate word in popular culture an unexpectedly intimate etymology.
- The 1699 Francis Reed and John Beavis contract at Port Dolphin is among the only surviving written matelotage documents, offering rare direct evidence for a practice that was largely undocumented by hostile or indifferent colonial record-keepers.
- Governor Le Vasseur’s 1645 attempt to suppress matelotage by importing women to Tortuga failed completely, demonstrating that the institution met social and emotional needs that simple heterosexual substitution could not address.
- Academic debate about whether matelotage was primarily economic, fraternal, or sexual remains open; a 2025 paper in Law and Humanities reframes it as a “queer contract” with deep roots in early modern Atlantic legal tradition, shifting focus from the men’s intentions to the social function of the institution itself.
Sources & further reading:
Leeson, Peter T. The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates — Princeton University Press, 2009 — press.princeton.edu
Burg, Barry Richard. Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition — NYU Press, 1984
Turley, Hans. Rum, Sodomy and the Lash: Piracy, Sexuality, and Masculine Identity — NYU Press, 1999
Fox, E.T. “Piratical Schemes and Contracts: Pirate Articles and their Society, 1660–1730” — PhD dissertation, University of Exeter, 2013 — ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/14872/FoxE.pdf
“Bound to a Mast: Matelotage and the Queer Contract in Shakespeare’s Maritime Plays” — Law and Humanities, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2025 — tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17521483.2025.2467551
Walters, Luke. “Pirate Legends: Matelotage and Mavericks” — University of Reading History Blog, 2023 — unireadinghistory.com
Frequently Asked Questions
What exactly was matelotage?
Matelotage was a formal partnership between two male pirates or buccaneers, most common during the Golden Age of Piracy (c. 1650–1730). At its core, it was an inheritance agreement — each partner pledging that the other would receive his possessions if he died suddenly. But matelotage frequently extended beyond finance, encompassing deep friendship, mutual care, and, according to many historians, romantic and sexual intimacy between men who found in each other a loyalty the wider world would not give them.
Was matelotage a form of same-sex marriage?
Many historians describe matelotage as functionally resembling a civil partnership or marriage. In some documented cases, partners exchanged gold rings and made public pledges of mutual commitment before witnesses — parallels to formal marriage ceremonies that are hard to ignore. However, calling it “gay marriage” risks importing modern legal and social categories into a seventeenth-century context. Matelotage was its own institution, operating by pirate social codes, not those of any modern legal system.
Where and when did matelotage originate?
Matelotage is traced to the 1620s and 1640s, emerging among French buccaneers in Hispaniola and the pirate haven of Tortuga in the Caribbean. The word itself comes from the French matelot (sailor). The institution spread across the wider Atlantic pirate world during the Golden Age of Piracy, appearing in documented cases as far afield as Madagascar by the late 1690s, suggesting it travelled with pirate crews as a recognised and portable custom.
What evidence exists that matelotage was real?
The strongest direct evidence is the 1699 written contract between Francis Reed and John Beavis, drawn up at Port Dolphin, Madagascar, before three witnesses. Eyewitness accounts from Alexander Exquemelin’s The Buccaneers of America (1678) describe buccaneer partnerships as a normal feature of life. Colonial records — including Governor Le Vasseur’s 1645 request for women to suppress matelotage — confirm that authorities took the institution seriously enough to actively try to eradicate it. All of these sources corroborate each other across different times and places.
Why didn’t matelotage disappear when women became available?
The failure of the 1645 Tortuga experiment is one of the most revealing facts about matelotage. When Governor Jean Le Vasseur imported women to break up same-sex partnerships, many pirates simply incorporated the women into existing arrangements, taking wives while maintaining their matelotage bonds. This demonstrates that matelotage was not purely a response to female absence — it fulfilled needs for loyalty, security, and recognised partnership that a new wife did not automatically replace.
How has matelotage influenced modern culture?
Matelotage has become a touchstone in both queer history scholarship and popular culture. The creator of HBO Max’s Our Flag Means Death (2022) explicitly credited matelotage as the historical fact that led him to frame pirate society as a “queer-positive world.” Starz’s Black Sails (2014–2017) portrayed its protagonist as canonically bisexual. A 2025 academic paper in Law and Humanities connects matelotage to early modern literary and legal traditions. The institution has moved from obscurity to become a significant reference point in ongoing conversations about queer history.
Did matelotage only exist among pirates?
Matelotage was documented most extensively among Caribbean buccaneers, but comparable male-partnership customs appear in other maritime contexts. The French navy and merchant marine both produced records of close male partnerships at sea. Édouard Corbière’s 1832 novel Le Négrier, written by a former French navy sailor and slave trader, described shipboard matelotage vividly, suggesting the practice was not unique to outright pirates. Whether equivalent institutions existed in other naval cultures remains an open area of historical research.