The subject of maritime robbery has been discussed in literature since the time of Homer. Let us start with the myths. The best-known myth is the story of the kidnapping of Dionysus, whom the pirates expected to sell to earn profit as he was a handsome young man. The infuriated god made his persecutors mad and when they jumped into the sea, he turned them into dolphins. The steersman, who recognised the deity and tried to dissuade his companions from their plans of robbery, was the only person to be spared. Quoted by many authors, the myth may shed some light on the treatment of pirate captives. The versions of the story vary: whereas sometimes Dionysus is abducted from a rock at other times he enters a Tyrrhenian ship as a passenger, and only on the high seas it turns out that the sailors do not intend to take him to Naxos but want to sell him into slavery. This may indicate that one of the ways pirates operated was to offer shipping services in order to bloodlessly obtain loot and prisoners.
In Ovid, it was Bacchus who complained about the heartlessness and cynicism of pirates, who broke their promises, and asked what the glory was in persecuting a younger person. This complaint seems very genuine. The poet Arion was also supposed to be a mythical abducted passenger. The Corinthians who were transporting him decided to rob him of the prizes he had won in a music competition. Arion himself was to be killed as an unnecessary burden. He asked to be able to play the last tune and when he later threw himself into the sea, he was saved by a dolphin attracted by his music. In this story, there also appears a theme of dishonest carriers who turn out to be sea robbers.
As one can see, for those travelling by sea and being on the coast, abductions perpetrated by pirates always posed a serious problem. Captivity was the most frequent fate of prisoners. ... However, it should be emphasised that, as a rule, capture by pirates led to loss of freedom and captives were often sold as slaves, usually far from their place of origin.
...
The other option used by pirates during raids was abducting prisoners in order to obtain a ransom. Ordinary people were not the only victims of pirate attacks; sometimes they were famous personas. For instance, Antonia, Mark Antony’s daughter, was captured, perhaps by way of revenge as her father led an anti-piracy campaign in Cilicia in 102 BC. Clodius was also abducted and apparently had difficulty collecting the ransom. In fact, magistrates like legates, quaestors and praetors could become prisoners too.36 The praetors, moreover, were sometimes captured on land along with an escort of lictors. Finally, one cannot forget about the most famous case, namely the kidnapping of Julius Caesar.
Obviously, in this situation, the key issue was the question of paying the ransom to the pirates, which is very interesting from a legal point of view. Literary texts show that the moral and customary obligation to pay the ransom rested on the relatives of the abductee. This is attested to by fragments of works by Seneca the Elder and Quintilian, in which the theme of being captured by pirates appeared many times. Relatives, most often fathers or sons of the victim, had to pay a ransom, which often required a journey to the ‘lion’s den’ – ire ad redemptionem.
The text shows that it was not safe: the buyer risked being captured and sharing their fate with the person they wanted to buy out. After all, they negotiated with criminals who were not bound by the norms of the ius gentium. In the absence of money for the ransom, a relative could also offer to be captured by the pirates in exchange for releasing the abductee (vicariis manibus redimere).
However, failing to buy out a relative was treated as neglect of the officium unless it was due to poverty. Captives could get better treatment by informing the pirates they had relatives, as this gave hope for a ransom. The lack of money could prove disastrous for the prisoner. Pirates used to kill such abductees, as shown by the numerous crosses they set up: cruces eorum, qui non redimuntur.
When relatives were not present or were unable to collect enough money, somebody else could pay the ransom. This behaviour was considered virtuous. Cicero distinguished two categories of generous people: the prodigal; and the noble. The former spent money on fleeting pleasures, while the latter paid off their friends’ debts, provided for their daughters’ dowries or bought them out from pirates. Squandering was universally condemned by the Romans, as it could lead to a reduction in their capacity to perform legal actions; on the other hand, generosity was viewed favourably.
In Ovid, it was Bacchus who complained about the heartlessness and cynicism of pirates, who broke their promises, and asked what the glory was in persecuting a younger person. This complaint seems very genuine. The poet Arion was also supposed to be a mythical abducted passenger. The Corinthians who were transporting him decided to rob him of the prizes he had won in a music competition. Arion himself was to be killed as an unnecessary burden. He asked to be able to play the last tune and when he later threw himself into the sea, he was saved by a dolphin attracted by his music. In this story, there also appears a theme of dishonest carriers who turn out to be sea robbers.
As one can see, for those travelling by sea and being on the coast, abductions perpetrated by pirates always posed a serious problem. Captivity was the most frequent fate of prisoners. ... However, it should be emphasised that, as a rule, capture by pirates led to loss of freedom and captives were often sold as slaves, usually far from their place of origin.
...
The other option used by pirates during raids was abducting prisoners in order to obtain a ransom. Ordinary people were not the only victims of pirate attacks; sometimes they were famous personas. For instance, Antonia, Mark Antony’s daughter, was captured, perhaps by way of revenge as her father led an anti-piracy campaign in Cilicia in 102 BC. Clodius was also abducted and apparently had difficulty collecting the ransom. In fact, magistrates like legates, quaestors and praetors could become prisoners too.36 The praetors, moreover, were sometimes captured on land along with an escort of lictors. Finally, one cannot forget about the most famous case, namely the kidnapping of Julius Caesar.
Obviously, in this situation, the key issue was the question of paying the ransom to the pirates, which is very interesting from a legal point of view. Literary texts show that the moral and customary obligation to pay the ransom rested on the relatives of the abductee. This is attested to by fragments of works by Seneca the Elder and Quintilian, in which the theme of being captured by pirates appeared many times. Relatives, most often fathers or sons of the victim, had to pay a ransom, which often required a journey to the ‘lion’s den’ – ire ad redemptionem.
The text shows that it was not safe: the buyer risked being captured and sharing their fate with the person they wanted to buy out. After all, they negotiated with criminals who were not bound by the norms of the ius gentium. In the absence of money for the ransom, a relative could also offer to be captured by the pirates in exchange for releasing the abductee (vicariis manibus redimere).
However, failing to buy out a relative was treated as neglect of the officium unless it was due to poverty. Captives could get better treatment by informing the pirates they had relatives, as this gave hope for a ransom. The lack of money could prove disastrous for the prisoner. Pirates used to kill such abductees, as shown by the numerous crosses they set up: cruces eorum, qui non redimuntur.
When relatives were not present or were unable to collect enough money, somebody else could pay the ransom. This behaviour was considered virtuous. Cicero distinguished two categories of generous people: the prodigal; and the noble. The former spent money on fleeting pleasures, while the latter paid off their friends’ debts, provided for their daughters’ dowries or bought them out from pirates. Squandering was universally condemned by the Romans, as it could lead to a reduction in their capacity to perform legal actions; on the other hand, generosity was viewed favourably.
I don't know about you, but reading just a couple pages of Roman Law and Maritime Commerce that I just stumbled on has helped me understand it better than IDK how many theologically-oriented essays I've read on the subject.