Ottoman Algeria in Western Diplomatic History with ... - Bibliothèque

harm” or nothing more than a “parasitic actor” in international relations.” 138
This view was also held by the Mediterranean historian Michel Fontenay who,
belonging to the frail school of revisionists, stated that the role of Algiers in the
economy of the Mediterranean was no more than what he called ‘corsairing
parasitism.’ Nonetheless he argued that the parasite was a “symbiotic parasite
that was tolerated by the organism” because Algerian corsairing was accepted
and well integrated in the economic structures of Europe. 139
At this point, one may but doubt the coherence of an approach that
considers the “Barbary pirates as the enemies of mankind [that] were destroyed
at sight whenever the opportunity offered during the three centuries of their
active work” and at the same time recognizes that “they were the agents of
well-organized states, states so thoroughly organized that the Great Powers of
Europe entered into many formal treaties with them.” 140 If this may not be seen
as incoherence, then Algiers is not to be considered as a pirate state but as a
corsairing state which dealt as equal to equal with other ‘corsairing states,’ i.e.:
the “Great Powers of Europe,” which also practiced corsairing. Both
signatories concluded treaties recognizing for each other reciprocity in
treatment as far as sovereignty, commerce, prizes, prisoners, and ransoms were
concerned.
138 Löwenhiem, Predators and Parasites, p. 81.
139 Fontenay, “La course dans l’économie portuaire,” p. 1324.
140 Montmorency, “The Barbary States in International Law,” p. 87.
105