The published Summarie was likely a Walsingham-orchestrated official account, edited to serve propaganda purposes

Evidence

Since Walsingham had been active in the planning of the voyage and had been interested in reports conccrning it at various stages, one might conjecture further that he or someone close to him decided to use this report as the basic text for whatever published account was to be issued in England and in friendly regions abroad. Thomas Cates, who became the editor of the text printed in London, and who stated that he had served on the voyage in Carleill’s own company, might have worked, therefore, under instructions from Mr Secretary. If this was the case, the various editions of the Summarie in 1588 and 1589 could be considered as the ‘official’ account of the voyage, judiciously edited so that it would support the purposes for which the voyage had been planned. — Mary Frear Keeler, Sir Francis Drake’s West Indian Voyage,…, 2144

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the recurring theme that Elizabethan narratives were propaganda instruments, worth weighing against Drake’s account as a source. — connects to: The published Summarie likely served as an official propaganda report for the voyage. — Mary Frear Keeler, Sir Francis Drake’s West Indian Voyage,…, 2144; The newsletter was likely addressed to Secretary Walsingham — Mary Frear Keeler, Sir Francis Drake’s West Indian Voyage,…, 721
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Mary Frear Keeler, Sir Francis Drake’s West Indian Voyage,…, 2144