# data[].attributes.body
Instead of just going in order, like a normal biography would, this book likes to jump around a lot to different times and dates and people, making it very difficult to put together a concrete timeline based just on the book alone.

# data[].attributes.body
Konstam, Angus Blackbeard: America's Most Notorious Pirate, Turning Publishing  Company, 2007.

# data[].attributes.body
Edward Teach, also known as Blackbeard was "...born in Bristol during around 1680." After his father died, and going through an abusive stepfather, he eventually left home and started work.  p. 26
--
https://www.history.com/topics/colonial-america/thirteen-colonies
Blackbeard lived long before any forms of America started coming to fruition, although many of his future antics would take place on some of the eastern territories of the now United States. I wonder what aspects would have changed about Blackbeards ventures, had the land here already been established as a country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
English Colonial Expansion

Sixteenth-century England was a tumultuous place. Because they could make more money from selling wool than from selling food, many of the nation's landowners were converting farmers' fields into pastures for sheep. This led to a food shortage; at the same time, many agricultural workers lost their jobs.

Did you know? Virginia Dare, the first American-born child of English parents, was born in Roanoke in 1587.

The 16th century was also the age of mercantilism, an extremely competitive economic philosophy that pushed European nations to acquire as many colonies as they could. As a result, for the most part, the English colonies in North America were business ventures. They provided an outlet for England's surplus population and (in some cases) more religious freedom than England did, but their primary purpose was to make money for their sponsors.

The Tobacco Colonies

In 1606, King James I divided the Atlantic seaboard in two, giving the southern half to the London Company (later the Virginia Company) and the northern half to the Plymouth Company.

The first English settlement in North America had actually been established some 20 years before, in 1587, when a group of colonists (91 men, 17 women and nine children) led by Sir Walter Raleigh settled on the island of Roanoke. Mysteriously, by 1590 the Roanoke colony had vanished entirely. Historians still do not know what became of its inhabitants.

In 1606, just a few months after James I issued its charter, the London Company sent 144 men to Virginia on three ships: the Godspeed, the Discovery and the Susan Constant. They reached the Chesapeake Bay in the spring of 1607 and headed about 60 miles up the James River, where they built a settlement they called Jamestown.

The Jamestown colonists had a rough time of it: They were so busy looking for gold and other exportable resources that they could barely feed themselves. It was not until 1616, when Virginia's settlers learned how to grow tobacco, that it seemed the colony might survive. The first enslaved African arrived in Virginia in 1619.

In 1632, the English crown granted about 12 million acres of land at the top of the Chesapeake Bay to Cecilius Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore. This colony, named Maryland after the queen, was similar to Virginia in many ways. Its landowners produced tobacco on large plantations that depended on the labor of indentured servants and (later) enslaved workers.

But unlike Virginia's founders, Lord Baltimore was a Catholic, and he hoped that his colony would be a refuge for his persecuted coreligionists. Maryland became known for its policy of religious toleration for all.

The New England Colonies

The first English emigrants to what would become the New England colonies were a small group of Puritan separatists, later called the Pilgrims, who arrived in Plymouth in 1620 to found Plymouth Colony. Ten years later, a wealthy syndicate known as the Massachusetts Bay Company sent a much larger (and more liberal) group of Puritans to establish another Massachusetts settlement. With the help of local natives, the colonists soon got the hang of farming, fishing and hunting, and Massachusetts prospered.

As the Massachusetts settlements expanded, they formed new colonies in New England. Puritans who thought that Massachusetts was not pious enough formed the colonies of Connecticut and New Haven (the two combined in 1665). Meanwhile, Puritans who thought that Massachusetts was too restrictive formed the colony of Rhode Island, where everyone-including Jewish people-enjoyed complete "liberty in religious concernments." To the north of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, a handful of adventurous settlers formed the colony of New Hampshire.

The Middle Colonies

In 1664, King Charles II gave the territory between New England and Virginia, much of which was already occupied by Dutch traders and landowners called patroons, to his brother James, the Duke of York. The English soon absorbed Dutch New Netherland and renamed it New York.

Most of the Dutch people (as well as the Belgian Flemings and Walloons, French Huguenots, Scandinavians and Germans) who were living there stayed put. This made New York one of the most diverse and prosperous colonies in the New World.

In 1680, the king granted 45,000 square miles of land west of the Delaware River to William Penn, a Quaker who owned large swaths of land in Ireland. Penn's North American holdings became the colony of "Penn's Woods," or Pennsylvania.

Lured by the fertile soil and the religious toleration that Penn promised, people migrated there from all over Europe. Like their Puritan counterparts in New England, most of these emigrants paid their own way to the colonies and had enough money to establish themselves when they arrived. As a result, Pennsylvania soon became a prosperous and relatively egalitarian place.

The Southern Colonies

By contrast, the Carolina colony, a territory that stretched south from Virginia to Florida and west to the Pacific Ocean, was much less cosmopolitan. In its northern half, hardscrabble farmers eked out a living. In its southern half, planters presided over vast estates that produced corn, lumber, beef and pork, and-starting in the 1690s-rice.

These Carolinians had close ties to the English planter colony on the Caribbean island of Barbados, which relied heavily on African slave labor, and many were involved in the slave trade themselves. As a result, slavery played an important role in the development of the Carolina colony. (It split into North Carolina and South Carolina in 1729.)

In 1732, inspired by the need to build a buffer between South Carolina and the Spanish settlements in Florida, the Englishman James Oglethorpe established the Georgia colony. In many ways, Georgia's development mirrored South Carolina's.

The Revolutionary War and the Treaty of Paris

In 1700, there were about 250,000 European settlers and enslaved Africans in North America's English colonies. By 1775, on the eve of revolution, there were an estimated 2.5 million. The colonists did not have much in common, but they were able to band together and fight for their independence.

The American Revolutionary War (1775-1783) was sparked after American colonists chafed over issues like taxation without representation, embodied by laws like The Stamp Act and The Townshend Acts. Mounting tensions came to a head during the Battles of Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775, when the "shot heard round the world" was fired.

It was not without warning; the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770 and the Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773 showed the colonists' increasing dissatisfaction with British rule in the colonies.

The Declaration of Independence, issued on July 4, 1776, enumerated the reasons the Founding Fathers felt compelled to break from the rule of King George III and parliament to start a new nation. In September of that year, the Continental Congress declared the "United Colonies" of America to be the "United States of America."

France joined the war on the side of the colonists in 1778, helping the Continental Army conquer the British at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781. The Treaty of Paris ending the American Revolution and granting the 13 original colonies independence was signed on September 3, 1783.

13 Colonies Flag

During the Revolutionary War, a flag featuring thirteen alternating red and white stripes and thirteen five-pointed stars arranged in a circle was adopted. This variant is also known as the " Betsy Ross Flag," as she was believed to have designed it. The stars and stripes represent the 13 colonies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 13 Colonies: Map, Original States & Facts | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 13 Colonies were a group of colonies of Great Britain that settled on the Atlantic coast of America in the 17th and 18th centuries. The colonies declared independence in 1776 to found the United States of America.

# data[].attributes.body
After having many jobs through his formative years, when Teach turned 18, he was done with all of the bland work he had in his past. He wanted something new and exciting. So, with breaking news being published, he began his journey down the "...line of work that his father..." once had. p. 34
--
I think at one point we all dreamed of following our parents footsteps, but not all lives walk the same paths. If his father hadn't died so early in his life, we could've seen a "Teach & Sons Privateering" business, like many are named today.
An interesting article on the '& Sons' name
https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/how-sons-became-a-retail-trope-and-the-cruelest-lie-in-branding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2015, the British government was forced to pay £8.8 million to Taylor & Sons when the Welsh engineering firm went into liquidation, and in so doing, laid off its 250-person team. On the surface, that might sound weird. After all, why would a government pay out a seven-figure sum to a midsize firm that went bankrupt?

In short, in all came down to a typo, a complex business bureaucracy and the odd practice of naming businesses.

The story of Taylor & Sons' big payout began in 2009, after the government's official registrar for all companies in the U.K., Companies House, mistook Taylor & Sons - at that point, a flourishing firm that had been operating for 134 years - with Taylor & Son Limited, a body shop based in Manchester, which had reported plans to shut down. The mix-up meant the British government had shut down all of Taylor & Sons accounts, bank transactions and U.K.-based trusts. Contracts were lost, staff didn't get paid and the firm's credit agreements with suppliers were no longer valid. And so, by the end of 2009, Taylor & Sons (the engineering firm) was forced to shut down for good.

After a six-year court battle, Taylor & Sons owner Philip Davison-Sebry won the payout for irreparable damages in London's high court. (He's currently using that money to start a new firm.) For its part, the British government still blames the incident on a clerical error, part of which it attributes to the large number of businesses in the U.K. that have some variation of the "& Son(s)" suffix in their names.

While there's no exact figure on the number of businesses with "& Son(s)" or "and Son(s)" currently operating in the U.K. - let alone worldwide - a basic search on Companies House yields more than 200,000 current results. Some of these businesses are expected - e.g., established bars like James Smith & Sons, a famous London umbrella makers that's been in operation since the 1830s and is still run by members of the James family, or White and Sons, a real-estate firm first established in 1817 that specializes in luxury country property.

Newer businesses, though - including streetwear brands like ONLY & SONS (est. 2014) or coffee shops like Parker & Sons (est. 2015) - have also used the suffix as part of their branding, despite being new, and most importantly, not being set up as family-owned businesses. Moreover, the resonance of "& Son(s)" isn't just a clever form of linguistic branding, it's an aesthetic one too, with brands like the U.K.-based "& Sons" clothing brand building ad campaigns around sons emulating their fathers in "dapper" work clothes, and old, industrial tool-shops being used as the backdrop for photoshoots for handmade leather belts and heavy-duty denim shirts - all, of course, shot on 35-millimeter film.

Obviously, the "& Son(s)" suffix isn't exclusively used for businesses. In fact, the folk-indie band Mumford & Sons probably represents its most successful contemporary usage. In 2016, the band's founder and lead singer, Marcus Mumford, that in retrospect, he believed the name of his band was "rubbish" and that it had been formed in a hurry. At the same time, he said that the name initially resonated because it felt like an antidote to a changing London. More specifically, he explained that "there's a bit of trying to stop the demise of London venues," and so, he wanted to create an "antiquated family business name" that was rare to see in the city.

Mumford might now see his band's name as slightly ridiculous, but the thinking behind it is still fairly common among new businesses in the U.K.'s main cities like London, Leeds, Birmingham and Manchester. "We wanted a name that sounded like it could stand the test of time," says Mark Smith, 32, the manager of Hunter & Sons coffee in Bath. The shop was founded in 2012 by Smith and two friends, who felt there was an absence of good, local coffee shops in Bath. Like Mumford, Smith liked the idea of having a place that sounded as though it was an established family name and gave the impression that this small store was part of the city's history - the shop itself is small and intimate with a rustic-theme decor. "We didn't want to give it a weird modern name," Mark adds, saying that while most of his customers are young, either university students or young professionals, the city itself has a sizeable number of people around retirement age who might have been turned away from a modern-sounding, hipster name.

Smith isn't sure whether the shop will last generations though. He and his business partners are unmarried, and none of them have children, let alone sons. But to him, "Hunter & Sons" isn't about their legacy, it's more about creating a place where residents can feel comfortable. "We want to make a place where you can come and work, meet your friends, or if you're young parents, where you can take your kids," he says. "So the name is reflective of the values we want to embody and represents a family-orientated place that gives back to the community. After all, isn't that what all the old family businesses did?"

Curiously, this attitude isn't shared by many men who run and work in businesses that were originally set up as father-son enterprises. Outside of a residential building site in South East London, I meet one of them - 50-year-old Phil Jenkins - in a local cafe for a cup of tea. Jenkins, wearing a dusty, torn grey T-shirt underneath a flourescent yellow jacket and black hard-hat, works as a construction manager for Jenkins & Sons, a firm his father set up shortly after World War II.

Jenkins is proud of keeping his family's company afloat - and for continuing the legacy of his father, Michael, who passed away in 2015. He worries, though, that he'll be the last member of his family to continue the business. His son plans to study law at university, with his eyes set on a corporate job in the city. More existentially still, high operational costs and a decreasing workload have forced Jenkins to downsize. His business' story is a familiar one, especially in major cities like London.

When I ask Jenkins about the name "Jenkins & Sons," he smiles, saying that when the name was chosen, there was a clear plan in mind. Its logo hasn't changed since 1960, a simple pattern of a large triangle with a smaller triangle inside. It has no website or social media presence, let alone any kind of vintage chic-aesthetic. "We're a family of laborers and hard grafters," he says. "We worked hard to set up this business. It took a lot of savings. My father had to work factory jobs and then work in his free time to save money, all while looking after my mum, me and my sister." To Jenkins, the existence of Jenkins & Sons is an embodiment of the struggle that working-class families like his have gone through - as well as a statement that the values of "honest, hard work" will continue to future generations.

It's also a relic of an older time, he says. "Back in the day, joining the family business wasn't a punishment, but something you should look forward to. I worked with my old man every day after I left school, and he taught me everything I know - how to use my hands, how to fix anything. So [the firm] also shows how strong our relationship was, and how much he trusted me to continue the legacy he made."

Right now, Jenkins believes the firm has a good five years left, but he emphasises that it's very much an exception. Friends of his who inherited firms set up by their fathers have "crashed and burned. They've gone bankrupt - a lot of them took a hit after the recession when they weren't able to finance themselves and the banks cut them off." Maybe more fatally, he believes that moments like the 2008 financial crash probably did a considerable amount of damage to the concept of family-owned business for younger generations. "I know my son saw me struggling during that period," he says. "I'd come home stressed and angry. I'd shout at him over silly things because I wasn't sure if the business would last. Maybe he saw all that and thought, I don't want that stress. I want something more secure. I don't blame him!"

As Jenkins leaves to get back to work, he says that even if Jenkins & Sons doesn't last beyond him, he'll be proud of what it will have left behind, which will at least outlive him - and possibly his son, too. "Foundations, frames, structuring - whatever happens, I can say we were part of that and that our family has helped people have their own familial communities here."

Needless to say, that legacy will long outlast the antique coffee-shop aesthetic.

Recommended Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How '& Sons' Became a Retail Trope - and the Cruelest Lie in Branding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2015, the British government was forced to pay £8.8 million to Taylor & Sons when the Welsh engineering firm went into liquidation, and in so doing, laid off its 250-person team. On the surface, that might sound weird. After all, why would a government pay out a seven-figure sum to a midsize firm that went bankrupt?

# data[].attributes.body
Teach began his work as a Privateer in the early 1700s, after the British declared that they would "...no longer demand a 20% cut..." of anything gathered from pirate crews. Gaining a large amount of experience which would later benefit him during his pirate years. p. 60
-- https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/taxes/federal-income-tax-brackets
This change made by the British government would be crazy if we compared it to something in the modern day economy. Imagine if the U.S said that they would no longer tax your money. This would mean that you would no longer be losing 10-40% of your income. I can see why many were so quick to sail into the privateering business during this time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For the 2022 tax year - taxes filed in 2023 - there are seven federal income tax brackets: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%. Your taxable income and filing status determine which tax brackets apply to you.

The U.S. federal tax rates are the same for both 2022 and 2023, but the income thresholds that inform the tax brackets are generally increased to reflect inflation each year. These inflation adjustments can help prevent taxpayers from ending up in a higher tax bracket as their cost of living rises.

The federal tax brackets for 2023, as well as the tax brackets for 2021 and previous years, can be found on this page. Jump to the 2023 tax brackets .

You can use the 2022 tax tables below to find your tax bracket. These brackets are for taxes due on the tax deadline, April 18, 2023.

2022 tax table: single filers

2022 tax table: married, filing jointly

2022 tax table: married, filing separately

2022 tax table: head of household

For the 2023 tax year, there are seven tax rates: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%, the same as in tax year 2022.

The income thresholds for each tax bracket were adjusted significantly due to the record-high inflation in 2022, which means that some people might be in a lower tax bracket than they were previously.

Taxes for the 2023 calendar year are due in April 2024.

2023 tax table: single filers

2023 tax table: married, filing jointly

2023 tax table: married, filing separately

2023 tax table: head of household

The government decides how much tax you owe by dividing your taxable income into chunks - also known as tax brackets - and each chunk gets taxed at the corresponding tax rate. You may hear people say that they are in the 12% tax bracket or the 22% bracket. This does not mean all of their income is taxed at that percentage; instead, that is the highest tax rate - the marginal rate - that applies to a portion of their income.

Being "in" a tax bracket doesn't mean you pay that federal income tax rate on everything you make. The U.S. has a progressive tax system. This means that chunks of your income fall into different tax brackets and are taxed at different rates. The progressive tax system means that people with higher taxable incomes are subject to higher federal income tax rates, and people with lower taxable incomes are subject to lower federal income tax rates.

The beauty of tax brackets is that no matter which bracket you're in, you won't pay that tax rate on your entire income.

The percentage of your taxable income that you pay in taxes is called your effective tax rate. To determine effective tax rate, divide your total tax owed (line 16) on Form 1040 by your total taxable income (line 15).

Income thresholds for tax brackets are updated annually. Several provisions in the tax code, including the income thresholds that inform the federal tax brackets, are adjusted annually to reflect the rate of inflation . This indexing aims to prevent taxpayers from experiencing "bracket creep," or the process of being pushed into a higher tax bracket because of inflation.

Let's say you're a single filer with $32,000 in taxable income. That puts you in the 12% tax bracket in 2022. But do you pay 12% on all $32,000? No. Actually, you pay only 10% on the first $10,275; you pay 12% on the rest. (Look at the tax brackets above to see the breakout.)

If you had $50,000 of taxable income, you'd pay 10% on that first $10,275 and 12% on the chunk of income between $10,276 and $41,775. And then you'd pay 22% on the rest because some of your $50,000 of taxable income falls into the 22% tax bracket. The total bill would be about $6,600 - about 13% of your taxable income, even though you're in the 22% bracket. That 13% is your effective tax rate.

What is a marginal tax rate?

The marginal tax rate is the tax rate paid on your last dollar of taxable income. This typically equates to your highest tax bracket.

For example, if you're a single filer with $35,000 of taxable income, you would be in the 12% tax bracket. If your taxable income went up by $1, you would pay 12% on that extra dollar, too.

If you had $46,000 of taxable income, however, most of it would still fall within the 12% bracket, but the last few hundred dollars would land in the 22% tax bracket. Your marginal tax rate would then be 22%.

How to get into a lower tax bracket and pay a lower federal income tax rate

Two common ways of reducing your tax bill are credits and deductions.

Tax credits can reduce your tax bill on a dollar-for-dollar basis; they don't affect what bracket you're in.

Tax deductions, on the other hand, reduce how much of your income is subject to taxes. Generally, deductions lower your taxable income by the percentage of your highest federal income tax bracket. So if you fall into the 22% tax bracket, a $1,000 deduction could save you $220.

In other words: Take all the tax deductions you can claim - they can reduce your taxable income and could kick you to a lower bracket, which means you pay a lower tax rate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2022-2023 Tax Brackets and Federal Income Tax Rates - NerdWallet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For the 2022 tax year - taxes filed in 2023 - there are seven federal income tax brackets: 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%. Your taxable income and filing status determine which tax brackets apply to you. The U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
In "...1715, it had already been a year and a half since..." all of the legitimate privateering contracts were terminated due to the end of the War of the Spanish Succession, leaving Blackbeard without a job. p. 66

# data[].attributes.body
With plenty of seafaring knowledge with no-where to put it, and unafraid of the risks that came with it, In 1716, Blackbeard decided to do away with his bland life, and become a pirate. p. 65
--
https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/the-innate-urge-to-rebel-how-age-gender-and-curiosity-can-fan-the-flames
I think many people can relate to Black beard here. Although maybe not in as villainous of a way as Teach, many people (including myself) go through the feeling of wanting to go against the rules and be able do whatever, whenever.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Remember not being able to stay up past your bedtime when you were a kid? Being told to not eat junk food, or to stay away from fire? You were forbidden from doing something, but your curiosity peaked, you wondered why you're being stopped. Maybe you secretly tried doing it anyway.

Rebellion seems to be one of those characteristics that exists in us from a very young age. The world seems fresh and new, with the words 'why' and 'why not' ready to fire off the tip of our tongue. The urge to rebel might lie naturally within us, stemming from the root of curiosity. Ultimately, social and political systems and the way we live our lives influence that curious nature within us, and what we do with it.

The Urge to Rebel

In 1966, scientist Jack W. Brehm was fascinated by human resistance to social influence, and that interest led to the formulation of a theory. The reactance theory describes the unpleasant feeling that emerges when people experience a threat to behaving freely. It's when our brain wants to rebel in order to guarantee that we're free to do whatever we want to do with our own lives. Imagine flying a spaceship and your captain tells you to poke all the buttons except the big, red one. And the pilot doesn't tell you why. Chances are, you'll want to press the red button to find out. This type of urge to rebel and do the opposite of what we're told could be an effort to regain a sense of control over a situation where we feel we have lost control. according to a 2015 report analyzing years of research on this theory.

Consequently, caregivers and parents of children use the oldest trick in the book: reverse psychology. This entails trying to make someone do what you want by asking them to do the opposite, and expecting them to disagree with you. Scientists also call it strategic self-anticonformity, because you're asking for something that is the opposite of what you really want. Parents and guardians often use this tactic to make children listen to them, or follow a set of instructions they put forward. In this case, utilizing reverse psychology combats the rebellious response that people may have.

Rebellion and Gender

Researchers have identified some variation between gender roles and rebellion. When it comes to the trait of agreeableness (which typically involves cooperation, maintenance of social harmony and consideration of the concerns of others), "women consistently score higher than men on agreeableness and related measures, such as tender-mindedness," according to a 2011 report that analyzed past research in relation to the big five personality theory .

Senior therapist and author Sally Baker says this gender trend stands true in her research. "Many people are compliant and do what they are told. This is more common with women who are encouraged implicitly or explicitly to be compliant," she says. Baker continues saying that fortunately, everything that is learned can be unlearned. "Young women can be taught how to increase their ability to say 'no' more frequently by placing and strengthening their boundaries around their own needs," she says.

Natural Rebellion

Human parents and caregivers tend to pass on specific sets of instructions and rules to children. One 2017 study at Ohio State University showed that when adults and children were required to memorize certain shapes shown to them on a screen, and identify the shape on a separate screen, "children were much better than adults at noticing when the non-target shape changed." Children would pay attention to shapes they weren't required to notice, whereas adults tended to focus only on what they were told was needed in the instructions of the experiment. It may be that in our initial years, we are naturally rebellious, curious, questioning and it is the societal worldview and social pressures of conformity that slowly decrease our rebellious natures over time.

Guardians commonly call adolescence the most rebellious stage of raising someone. Baker says that "adolescence is the perfect storm for feeling rebellious. This is the time when there is a growing realization of the fallibility of the adult caregivers in their lives, together with their increasing impetus to forge their own path." She elaborates that even hormonal changes can add to their sense of urgency and cause dissatisfaction and frustration with their immediate circumstances. This is a period of personal growth when unfairness, human limitations and even international corruption can fuel a young person's sense of righteous indignation and rebellion. "This healthy response to the status quo is part of what fuels each generation's revolutionary drive to make changes," she says.

With reference to Baker's observations, adolescence may be the rawest form of exhibiting human rebellion. It is the first time your worldview slowly starts belonging to you. The rose colored lenses fall off. It's an era of one's life before one has lived long enough to succumb to the belief of "this is just the way things are."

History and research has shown that young people in any era are predisposed to shake up the established order. It may be that growing older and adjusting to living as an adult in our world's systems is what dims our roots of rebellion. While it can't be generalized, people seem to question less as they grow older past the age of adolescence. That trend begs the question: Does growing older and building a life on one's own terms mean it is inevitable for your natural curiosity to dim? The research suggests that may be the case - unless, of course, you rebel against the trend.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Innate Urge to Rebel: How Age, Gender and Curiosity Can Fan the Flames

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rebellion is a complex human behavior that often begins at a young age. Research shows why it might natural rise up and fade away with age.

# data[].attributes.body
After becoming a pirate of some worth, his then captain "...Captain Benjamin Hornigold gave him his own sloop..." to sail to the Bahamas with. The Bahamas were the central hub for pirates at the time, so it made sense as the next step in Blackbeard's travels. p. 67
--
Many people know how good it feels to get a promotion, but imagine if that promotion was getting your own ship? I know being able to drive around a company car is cool, but from being a crewmate, to a captain of your own vessel, Blackbeard was probably over the moon. Or, he might have planned this out strategically. No-one can know for sure!

# data[].attributes.body
After deciding he needed a bigger boat, and with the right opportunity coming up, "Blackbeard took over the French slave ship 'Concorde'...", deciding to make it his own and re-name it to the "Queen Anne's Revenge" p. 102

# data[].attributes.body
At some point during his travels, Blackbeard headed over to Honduras, where he takes over a ship named the "Revenge". This time the ship belonged to "...a pirate named Stede Bonnet." p. 129

# data[].attributes.body
For a week Blackbeard and his ally Charles Vane decided to hold a party on the "island of Ocracoke in North Carolina", which to their surprise, would soon turn for the worse. p. 213

# data[].attributes.headline
17 | The Bloody Battle of Ocracoke Island

# data[].attributes.subject
17 | The Bloody Battle of Ocracoke Island

# data[].attributes.body
While in the "...Ocracoke inlet, North Carolina...", Edward Teach engaged in the battle of Ocracoke island, which would be his last battle as the fearsome pirate "Blackbeard". p. 224

# data[].attributes.headline
20 | The world learns about the adventures of "Blackbeard"

# data[].attributes.subject
20 | The world learns about the adventures of "Blackbeard"

# data[].attributes.body
In 1724, Charles Johnson published his "...book A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the most notorious Pyrates." which included the tales of many different pirates of the 17th and early 18th centuries. The most infamous, though, would be his tales of Edward "Blackbeard" Teach. p. 20
--
Although it may have originally been written in 1724, you can still buy copies of his book A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the most notorious Pyrates on amazon today!
https://www.amazon.com/General-History-Robberies-Murders-Notorious/dp/1599219050

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
FREE delivery Friday, June 17 if you spend $25 on items shipped by Amazon

Or fastest delivery Wednesday, June 15. Order within 22 hrs 12 mins

[{"displayPrice":"$13.99","priceAmount":13.99,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"13","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"99","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"xSltpFpMQ7cADIeyQv56qwNEdCweShNBd0GSVRe24sY49RHRPTn1wphAsM1bVTagmVnMFHjnvxAiGQpUbq2sZNX6AsXhN0%2BbNYZwFUZ%2FRkdoxMyd6xBXAfV0%2ByRo3Wb3t7kewJHKTic%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW"},{"displayPrice":"$13.29","priceAmount":13.29,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"13","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"29","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"6WUbvwYbadIABkEHmEz3cBrYL92lcagu%2BUfYOFSz6V6nqEVsCq5xdtRnMhVn5S1T4Lo799oL9edXLxtQQd0WgtFkfk%2FYXVomGedViyUa0XYQJJcoo6AoLu46U9Ez2t1WT849y%2FfVFSqNu4Llhy630M5aN%2BJ2xqYRz8CnkyyG1VE0rG%2BPF2EKsw%3D%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED"}]

$

$13.99

() Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details

Initial payment breakdown

Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.

Your transaction is secure

We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more

General History of the Ro... has been added to your Cart

Add a gift receipt for easy returns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
General History of the Robberies & Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
General History of the Robberies & Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates [Captain Johnson, Charles, Cordingly, David] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. General History of the Robberies & Murders of the Most Notorious Pirates