This article examines the historical misrepresentation surrounding Francis Drake and British naval exploits, exemplified by a recent tweet erroneously proclaiming him as the “first commander” to circumnavigate the globe. It explores how this distortion ignores the earlier circumnavigations of Magellan-Elcano and Loaísa, exaggerates Drake’s achievements while minimizing his failures, and perpetuates a skewed narrative of naval history. The article argues that this misrepresentation is not only historically incorrect, but also reveals a national insecurity and a reluctance to face historical realities objectively.

A tweet from November 26, 2020, has recently come to light, like a poorly buried zombie, perpetrated by the user @OnthisdayRN, an account dedicated to educating the public with ephemerides about the Royal Navy’s exploits. This tweet is a clear example of the historical distortion that often surrounds the figure of Francis Drake and British naval feats.

The tweet in question, translated, reads as follows:

#OnThisDay 1580 Francis Drake returned to #plymouth 3 yrs after leaving, during which he became 1st commander to circumnavigate the world. A replica of his ship the Golden Hind (originally Pelican) is in London. Queens share of treasure was more than rest of her income that year pic.twitter.com/hUUGRpMnEX

— On This Day RN (@OnthisdayRN) September 26, 2020

What’s striking, and extremely pathetic, is the inclusion of the term “commander” in the text. Apparently, the British pathological need to be first in everything has led this user to have to fit Drake’s title in order to put “first” in the tweet, adding another great feat to the British annals. This distortion of historical facts is not only misleading but also diminishes the achievements of other explorers who preceded Drake.

They could have put “the first Englishman” or even “the first pirate,” both verifiable facts, or even that he was the first native of Tavistock, Devon, another fact as easily corroborated as it is unnecessary. However, the choice of words reveals a deliberate attempt to distort history to aggrandize Drake’s figure.

The use of the term “commander” in the statement is misleading and ultimately irrelevant to the historical significance of the achievement. Whether the first person to circumnavigate the globe was a captain, a sailor, or held any other rank does not change the fact of who accomplished it first. This historical distortion conveniently ignores previous circumnavigation.

It’s crucial to remember that the first circumnavigation of the world was completed by the Magellan-Elcano expedition between 1519 and 1522. Although Ferdinand Magellan did not survive to complete the journey, Juan Sebastián Elcano led the expedition back to Spain, thus completing the first documented circumnavigation of the world. This feat, achieved almost 60 years before Drake, is often minimized in British narratives, which constitutes a flagrant distortion of historical facts.

Furthermore, it’s important to mention the expedition of García Jofre de Loaísa, which set sail in 1525 and completed the second circumnavigation of the world in 1536. Although this expedition suffered numerous losses, including the death of Loaísa himself, the ship Santa María de la Victoria, under the command of Hernando de la Torre, managed to complete the journey. This second circumnavigation of the world, also prior to Drake, is frequently omitted in Anglo-Saxon narratives, representing another form of historical distortion.

The tendency to exaggerate Drake’s achievements while minimizing his failures is another form of historical distortion. For example, the aforementioned tweet makes no reference to the numerous pirate attacks and looting that Drake carried out during his voyage, activities that today would be considered international crimes. This selective omission of information is a subtle but effective way of distorting history.

It may also imply Drake’s tendency to hide from danger, as he did several times while harassing the Spanish Armada, only to flee at the sight of approaching reinforcements. These episodes of cowardice or excessive caution, depending on how you look at it, are rarely mentioned in the glorifying narratives of Drake, which constitutes another form of distortion by omission.

“The sea makes no distinctions; it treats all sailors equally, whether officers or common seamen,” said Samuel Pepys, but apparently that equality disappears when there’s an unhealthy passion not only for aggrandizing the enterprises of a nation but also for belittling the great epics of the Spanish Empire. This quote from Pepys further highlights the irony of the British obsession with ranks and titles in their historical narratives.

We must remember that Drake’s voyage around the world took place between 1577 and 1580, almost 60 years after Elcano’s. While his achievements are notable, considering the many stops he made to loot and plunder, he was not the first, nor the second to accomplish this feat. The distortion of these facts is not only historically incorrect but also diminishes the achievements of the Spanish and Portuguese explorers who opened these sea routes.

It’s important to highlight some of Drake’s failures that are often omitted in British narratives, constituting another form of historical distortion. For example, the Drake-Norris expedition of 1589, known as the English Counter Armada, was a total disaster. This expedition, which aimed to attack the Iberian Peninsula, failed in all its main objectives and resulted in the loss of numerous ships and thousands of lives. This failure is rarely mentioned alongside Drake’s “glorious” feats, which represents a clear distortion by omission.

Another example of Drake’s failures that are often overlooked is his last expedition in 1595-1596. This expedition, which aimed to attack Spanish colonies in the Caribbean, resulted in a catastrophic failure. Drake not only failed to capture any significant booty, but also lost several ships and many men. Drake himself died during this expedition, a victim of dysentery. The omission of these failures in popular narratives about Drake is another form of historical distortion that seeks to maintain his image as a “hero” intact.

The excessive glorification of Drake also tends to ignore the darker aspects of his career, such as his involvement in the slave trade. On his 1572-1573 voyage, Drake was involved in the African slave trade, an activity that today is considered a crime against humanity. However, this aspect of his career is often minimized or completely omitted in British narratives, which constitutes another form of historical distortion

It is pathetic to see a nation like Great Britain having to resort to these petty subterfuges to claim an alleged naval glory that seems to be fading away as time passes. The need to distort history to maintain an image of naval superiority is a symptom of national insecurity and an unwillingness to face historical realities objectively.

In conclusion, the historical distortion surrounding the figure of Francis Drake and British naval feats is a worrying phenomenon that distorts our understanding of the past. It is crucial that historians and the general public approach these narratives with a critical eye, recognizing both the achievements and failures of historical figures like Drake. Only through a balanced and honest evaluation of history can we truly appreciate the complexities of maritime explorations and the lasting impact they had on the world.

The distortion of history not only does a disservice to the truth, but also perpetuates myths and stereotypes that can have consequences in the present. It is the responsibility of everyone, historians and the general public alike, to question these biased narratives and seek a more complete and nuanced understanding of our shared past. Only in this way can we truly learn from history and avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.